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 Retributivists may have to make some sort of peace with the thesis of limiting retributivism.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Michael Moore's intrinsic retributivism holds that proportionality is not vague but tracks the objective moral gravity of wrongdoing.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If desert is a precise moral fact grounded in the nature of the offense, retributivists need not retreat to limiting thresholds at all.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Limiting retributivism, as articulated by Norval Morris, is a hybrid theory that sacrifices retributivism's core claim that punishment is justified only by desert.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A pure retributivist can coherently reject the limiting compromise by accepting that proportionality vagueness is an epistemic problem, not a metaphysical one requiring theoretical revision.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • The constraints of proportionality seem inherently vague.
      ?

      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.