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 Moral knowledge is impossible

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.If moral knowledge is possible, then some moral judgments are beliefs
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Moral judgments by themselves necessarily give us some motivation to act, even without the accompaniment of already existing desires
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A belief by itself, unaided by already existing desires, can never give us any motivation to act
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Moral facts, if they exist, would be metaphysically queer entities unlike anything else in the natural world (Mackie's argument from queerness).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Knowledge requires that our belief-forming faculties reliably track the relevant facts in the domain.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.No credible evolutionary or naturalistic account explains why human cognitive faculties would reliably track non-natural moral facts rather than merely fitness-enhancing beliefs.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Persistent, deep disagreement among equally informed, rational, and reflective agents is strong evidence that the disputed domain lacks objective, knowable facts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Moral disagreement is cross-cultural, historically persistent, and survives full exposure to relevant non-moral empirical facts, unlike disagreements in mathematics or science.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The best explanation for this irreducible moral disagreement is that moral judgments express non-cognitive attitudes rather than tracking knowable moral truths (as Blackburn's quasi-realism and Gibbard's expressivism argue).
      ?

      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.