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 No thought experiment that involves non-human animals or computers as persons is well conceived.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Thought experiments examining concepts that do not pick out natural kinds face insurmountable relevance problems.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Personhood, as treated in such experiments, would extend beyond the natural-kind category of human beings.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Strawson's 'Individuals' grounds personhood in the irreducible unity of psychological and physical predicates ascribable to a single subject of experience.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Non-human animals and computers lack the requisite bidirectional ascribability of M-predicates and P-predicates that constitutes a genuine Strawsonian person.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Thought experiments presupposing personhood in entities that structurally lack this dual-ascription framework import a conceptually incoherent subject, rendering conclusions ungeneralizable.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Locke's account ties personal identity to forensic applicability—persons are loci of moral accountability, praise, blame, and legal standing within a moral community.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Thought experiments positing animal or computational persons systematically underdetermine the forensic conditions Locke identifies as constitutive of personhood, not merely incidental to it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.An experiment that strips away the constitutive forensic scaffolding of personhood does not isolate a purer concept but dissolves the concept it purports to examine.
      ?

      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.