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 skeptics can criticize any moral belief or theory w... — Carmelics
    Home/Moral Responsibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Moral skeptics can criticize any moral belief or theory without offering a positive argument for moral skepticism.

    Moral ResponsibilitySkepticism
    ?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.If the burden of proof rests on those making positive moral claims, moral skeptics are not obligated to provide positive arguments for their skepticism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Moral skeptics need only deny that the burden of proof falls on them to be in a dialectically defensible position.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Dialectical positions that offer only critique without positive commitments are vulnerable to Agrippa's trilemma: they must either dogmatize, regress, or circularlize their own skeptical standards.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Moral skeptics who invoke burden-of-proof norms implicitly appeal to an epistemic norm, which itself requires justification and constitutes a positive philosophical commitment.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.As Sextus Empiricus recognized, the purest skeptic must suspend judgment on skepticism itself, meaning selective deployment of skeptical critique is not a stable position but a disguised dogmatism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Rawls and Scanlon argue that reflective equilibrium provides justificatory resources that make moral beliefs epistemically analogous to empirical beliefs, shifting the burden back onto the skeptic.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If moral skeptics borrow the burden-of-proof asymmetry from epistemology without argument, they presuppose a metaethical position—noncognitivism or error theory—that itself demands positive defense.
      ?

      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 ResponsibilitySkepticism

    Related

    As Sextus Empiricus recognized, the purest skeptic must suspend judgment on skep...Dialectical positions that offer only critique without positive commitments are ...If moral skeptics borrow the burden-of-proof asymmetry from epistemology without...If the burden of proof rests on those making positive moral claims, moral skepti...
    +3 moreShow less
    Moral skeptics need only deny that the burden of proof falls on them to be in a ...Moral skeptics who invoke burden-of-proof norms implicitly appeal to an epistemi...Rawls and Scanlon argue that reflective equilibrium provides justificatory resou...

    Similar

    If the burden of proof rests on those making positive moral claims, mo...90%Moral skeptics can occupy a default position of withholding positive m...90%Therefore, opponents of moral skepticism must carry the burden of proo...87%The skeptic denies that such objective moral standards exist.86%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: skepticism-moral
    View source passageHide passage
    Moral skeptics, in response, sometimes try to shift the burden of proof to their opponents. Anyone who makes the positive moral claim that sodomy is morally wrong seems to need some reason for that claim, just as someone who claims that there is life on Mars seems to need evidence for that claim. If the presumption is always against those who make positive moral claims, then it is opponents of moral skepticism who must carry the burden of proof. Or, at least, moral skeptics can deny that the bur
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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