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 obligations are not requirements of practical reason

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 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 for 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

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

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