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 Norman Daniels and others have shown that FEO can be rendered action-guiding through institutional specification without importing continuity constraints that risk collapsing FEO into luck egalitarianism.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Institutional specification without continuity constraints cannot distinguish unfair disadvantage from brute bad luck in outcomes post-procedure.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.FEO's core appeal requires some account of how equal access at a starting point justifies unequal outcomes—abandoned here, FEO loses distinctive content.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Purely procedural fairness is action-guiding only if institutions are designed; the hard work (justifying design) reintroduces luck egalitarian problems.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Institutional rules can operationalize FEO by specifying access conditions that don't require tracking individual advantage across time.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Without continuity constraints, FEO avoids the circularity problem: defining opportunity partly by outcomes, which luck egalitarianism requires.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Fair procedures (e.g., education access, antidiscrimination law) provide action-guidance without needing to isolate responsibility from circumstance.
      ?

      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.