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 Mill's argument, though poorly framed, retains substantial force when understood on its own terms

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Moore's 'open question argument' shows that 'desired' and 'good' remain conceptually distinct regardless of how we reframe Mill's inference.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.No charitable reconstruction of Mill's proof escapes the naturalistic fallacy: empirical facts about desire cannot entail normative conclusions about desirability.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If the argument's 'basic thrust' requires abandoning its stated premises, the resulting argument is no longer Mill's argument but a different one entirely.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Sidgwick demonstrated in Methods of Ethics that Mill's proof conflates the claim that each person desires their own happiness with the distinct claim that general happiness is desirable.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.This fallacy of composition is structural, not merely linguistic, and survives any charitable reframing of the 'desired/desirable' ambiguity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The analogy between 'desired'/'desirable' and 'heard'/'audible' is linguistically flawed
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.'Desirability' means worthy of being desired, not merely capable of being desired
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Mill's framing is admittedly unfortunate
      ?

      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.