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 Moore's brand of consequentialism (the view that the right action is always the action with the best actual consequences) must be rejected.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.There are some actions which we ought to do even though they will not produce the best actual consequences.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Moore's brand of consequentialism holds that the right action is always the action with the best actual consequences.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.These two claims are incompatible.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Moral agents cannot reliably calculate actual consequences before acting, as Sidgwick noted in Methods of Ethics (1874).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A theory that makes rightness depend on unknowable facts at decision-time renders moral guidance practically impossible.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Bernard Williams argued that an action-guiding moral theory must be assessable from the deliberative standpoint prior to action.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Ross's prima facie duties framework shows that fidelity, gratitude, and justice generate obligations independent of outcome optimization.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If Moore's view were correct, breaking a solemn promise whenever marginally better consequences result would always be obligatory, which contradicts robust moral intuitions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Rawls in 'Two Concepts of Rules' demonstrated that rule-based constraints on consequentialist reasoning better match our considered judgments about justice.
      ?

      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.