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 Rawlsian egalitarianism's justificatory logic applies wherever coercive schemes impose terms of cooperation, regardless of whether those schemes are domestic or international.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Domestic coercion operates through unified sovereign institutions with democratic accountability; international coercion typically lacks equivalent legitimate authority.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Rawls specifically distinguished international from domestic contexts because reciprocal benefit depends on stable, culturally-coherent political societies, not all humans.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Extending egalitarian duties globally creates indeterminacy: unclear who bears obligations, to whom, and what 'fair terms' even means without shared political culture.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.If coercive schemes bind people to cooperative terms, those subject to coercion deserve justification for why they must comply, regardless of borders.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.International institutions (trade agreements, sanctions, security arrangements) impose binding rules on citizens as genuinely as domestic law does.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Principles of fairness shouldn't arbitrarily exclude people from equal consideration based solely on nationality when they're subject to shared coercive systems.
      ?

      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.