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 Peter Singer's drowning child argument demonstrates that the moral weight of preventing serious harm does not diminish based on proximity or relational distance.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Special obligations to near others (family, community) arise from reciprocal relationships and historical commitments, not arbitrary proximity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Effective moral agency requires focusing resources where one has knowledge, accountability, and capacity—typically closest relationships first.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The drowning child analogy fails because it excludes systemic factors: distant poverty involves complex causes beyond individual rescue-like duties.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Moral obligations based on preventing serious harm apply equally regardless of spatial or relational distance to the person at risk.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.We cannot consistently claim distance eliminates obligation while accepting that our actions can cause harm to distant strangers.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If proximity alone determined moral weight, we could justify ignoring preventable deaths abroad—an intuitively unjustifiable position.
      ?

      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.