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
    Moral obligations are not requirements of practical reason — Carmelics
    Home/Moral Responsibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Moral obligations are not requirements of practical reason

    Moral ResponsibilityTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.The constitutive norms of practical reason may favor morality but do not require it
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.An ideally coherent agent who values torturing people for fun is conceivable and would have reasons for that action
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If the value of humanity were a constitutive norm of reasoning, such an agent would be impossible
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kant's Groundwork establishes that the categorical imperative derives from the formal structure of rational willing itself, not contingent desires.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.An agent who wills torturing for fun cannot universalize that maxim without self-contradiction, violating the constitutive logic of rational agency.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore the conceivability of such an agent reflects empirical psychology, not the normative standards internal to practical reason.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Korsgaard's constitutivism holds that agency requires valuing one's own humanity as the source of normative authority, on pain of practical self-annihilation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.An agent who systematically undermines humanity destroys the very reflective endorsement structure that makes their own reasons binding, generating an internal contradiction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The supporting argument conflates logical conceivability with normative coherence, which constitutivism explicitly distinguishes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

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

    Topics

    Moral ResponsibilityTruth & Knowledge

    Connections

    1 topic

    Virtue Ethics3 linked

    Related

    An agent who systematically undermines humanity destroys the very reflective end...An agent who wills torturing for fun cannot universalize that maxim without self...An ideally coherent agent who values torturing people for fun is conceivable and...If the value of humanity were a constitutive norm of reasoning, such an agent wo...
    +5 moreShow less
    Kant's Groundwork establishes that the categorical imperative derives from the f...Korsgaard's constitutivism holds that agency requires valuing one's own humanity...The constitutive norms of practical reason may favor morality but do not require...The supporting argument conflates logical conceivability with normative coherenc...Therefore the conceivability of such an agent reflects empirical psychology, not...

    Similar

    Moral obligations entail reasons for action82%Special obligations are not genuinely special but only derivatively so81%Moral obligations trump other kinds of obligations80%Human reason cannot establish moral obligation — only God's imposition...80%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: constructivism-metaethics
    View source passageHide passage
    The case for Humean constructivism rests on the alleged inadequacy of competing views: “it is what we are forced to by the untenability of realism plus the failure of Kantian versions of metaethical constructivism” (Street 2010: 371). Humean constructivism denies that normative truths are independent of the deliverances of practical reasoning (Bagnoli 2002: 131; Street 2008a, 2010, 2012; Velleman 2009; Lenman 2010, 2012). To this extent, Humean constructivism builds on the Kantian insight that n
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit