Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Moral considerations must somehow produce sensations of pleasure or pain in human beings
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
2 perspectives
Reason for 1 of 2
?
1.
Aristotle's virtuous agent acts from stable rational dispositions (hexeis) that motivate without requiring occurrent felt pleasure as the proximate cause.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
The pleasure a virtuous person takes in right action is a byproduct of virtuous activity, not the motivational mechanism that produces it.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Therefore, motivation and felt pleasure can come apart, undermining the claim that moral considerations must produce sensations to motivate.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reason for 2 of 2
?
1.
Kant demonstrated that pure practical reason can motivate action through rational recognition of duty alone, without any sensory feeling.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
If rational recognition of the moral law suffices for motivation, moral considerations need not produce pleasure or pain to be action-guiding.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Moral considerations must be motivating in beings like us
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
For moral considerations to be motivating, they must produce some felt sensation
?
How convincing is this?
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.