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
    Sanction utilitarianism defines wrongness via what ought ... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Sanction utilitarianism is internally inconsistent

    Sanction utilitarianism defines wrongness via what ought to be sanctioned, but 'ought' here must invoke a prior moral standard independent of sanctions.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Sanction utilitarianism risks circularity: defining wrongness by what deserves sanctions requires prior criteria for what sanctions are justified.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.All moral frameworks ultimately appeal to foundational standards; sanction utilitarianism cannot be self-justifying without external moral principles.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The claim that 'this act ought to be sanctioned' expresses a moral judgment distinct from the factual claim that sanctions will occur.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Sanction utilitarianism avoids circularity by grounding 'ought to sanction' in empirical consequences, not prior moral standards.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.All theories presuppose foundational standards; this is not a unique problem for sanction utilitarianism but shared across all moral views.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The moral 'ought' in sanctions can reduce to what maximizes utility, making an independent standard unnecessary, not a logical requirement.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Connections

    1 topic

    Consequentialism1 linked

    Related

    All moral frameworks ultimately appeal to foundational standards; sanction utili...All theories presuppose foundational standards; this is not a unique problem for...Sanction utilitarianism avoids circularity by grounding 'ought to sanction' in e...Sanction utilitarianism is internally inconsistent
    +3 moreShow less
    Sanction utilitarianism risks circularity: defining wrongness by what deserves s...The claim that 'this act ought to be sanctioned' expresses a moral judgment dist...The moral 'ought' in sanctions can reduce to what maximizes utility, making an i...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)