Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Millian liberalism does not require state neutrality about the good

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Mill's harm principle functions as a side-constraint on state action, not a positive endorsement of any particular conception of the good life.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A framework that limits state interference without ranking life-plans is procedurally neutral in the morally relevant sense, even if it presupposes some background values.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Rawls and Dworkin distinguish neutrality of aim from neutrality of effect, and Millian liberalism satisfies the former by targeting equal liberty rather than promoting specific excellences.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Recognizing autonomy as a precondition for pursuing any good is distinct from endorsing autonomy as itself a substantive good within a particular conception of flourishing.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Kantian and neo-Kantian liberals argue that autonomy-preservation is a meta-level commitment about agency, not a first-order perfectionist judgment about what makes lives go well.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Millian perfectionism holds that autonomy and self-determination are higher-order goods
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A state that recognizes specific goods as higher-order has taken a stand on questions of the good
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The Millian state explicitly recognizes autonomy and self-determination as higher-order goods
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.