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 Railton's naturalistic consequentialism reduces 'good' to non-normative facts about idealized desire-satisfaction, eliminating irreducible evaluative commitments.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Idealization conditions themselves embed evaluative judgments about which desires count, making the reduction circular.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Someone might rationally desire things we'd judge bad (power, domination); desire-satisfaction alone doesn't capture wrongness.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The naturalistic reduction may explain desire but cannot ground normativity—why should facts about desires obligate us morally?
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Normative facts are metaphysically puzzling; reducing them to natural facts avoids mysterious non-physical properties.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Idealized desire-satisfaction captures what we care about; what survives rational reflection deserves normative weight.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Other reductive theories (e.g., moral naturalism) successfully eliminate seeming irreducibles without losing explanatory power.
      ?

      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.