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
    One can be under conflicting obligations at a particular ... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Moral Responsibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Moral dilemmas are possible

    One can be under conflicting obligations at a particular time

    Justice & PunishmentMoral Responsibility
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

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

    Topics

    Moral ResponsibilityJustice & Punishment

    Connections

    1 topic

    Truth & Knowledge1 linked

    Related

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Moral Responsibility
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    It is not always possible to fulfill all obligations one is under simultaneouslyMoral dilemmas are possibleThere are various kinds of rationality, including moral, epistemic, and prudenti...

    Similar

    It is not always possible to fulfill all obligations one is under simu...83%These two distinct sources of concern can generate competing obligatio...79%Moral obligations trump other kinds of obligations78%Possibilism can generate obligations that, if acted on, would result i...75%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: pragmatic-belief-god
    View source passageHide passage
    The Duty Argument employs the box and diamond in the standard fashion as operators for, respectively, conceptual necessity and possibility. The alpha is just a placeholder for actions, or kinds of actions. The locution “(overall) rational” or “(overall) irrational” presupposes that there are various kinds of rationality, including moral rationality, epistemic rationality, and prudential rationality.[10] The idea that there are various kinds of rationality, or put any way, that one can be under

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective