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 Rational choice procedures presuppose prior normative standards (e.g., what counts as 'rational'), making the construction circular.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Not all circularity is vicious; coherent systems of standards can be self-supporting without reducing to arbitrary assumption.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Rational choice procedures can be defined formally (consistency, transitivity) without presupposing specific normative content about *what* to choose.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The claim conflates justifying *which* standards to adopt with the logical structure of applying any consistent standard—different problems.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.All normative standards require justification, but rational choice procedures themselves depend on prior standards to evaluate options.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.We cannot escape circularity by appealing to 'rationality itself' as the standard, since defining rationality already presupposes value judgments.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Historical disagreement about what counts as rational (utility maximization vs. satisficing vs. virtue) shows standards aren't self-evident.
      ?

      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.