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 Retributive justice must ultimately be justified in a larger moral context that shows it is plausibly grounded in, or at least connected to, other deeply held moral principles.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kant argues retributive punishment is a categorical imperative grounded in respect for rational agency, requiring no external moral justification.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Demanding retributivism justify itself through other principles commits a category error, subordinating deontological duties to consequentialist scaffolding.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If retribution requires external grounding, so does any foundational moral principle, collapsing into infinite regress or arbitrary stopping points.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Intuitionism, defended by Ross and Moore, holds that some moral truths—including desert-based punishment—are self-evident and non-inferential.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The reflective equilibrium model presupposes that intuitions must cohere with principles, but strong near-universal intuitions about desert may themselves constitute moral data irreducible to theory.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Only by being grounded in or connected to other deeply held moral principles should the intuitive appeal of retributive justice be regarded, in reflective equilibrium, as morally sound.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Retributive justice faces challenges that require a response.
      ?

      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.