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 Scanlon's 'reasonable rejection' test is indexed to individuals' actual standpoints, not hypothetical positions of ignorance.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Scanlon's formulation requires principles to be rejectable by anyone, which functionally requires abstracting away from partial standpoints to find common ground.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Without some idealization away from actual biases, prejudices, and limited information, 'reasonable rejection' becomes indeterminate and manipulable.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Scanlon himself appeals to reasonableness constraints that implicitly invoke impartial standards beyond what actual standpoints alone can justify.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Scanlon explicitly grounds contractualism in what actual people could reasonably reject from their real positions, not behind veils of ignorance.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Actual standpoints capture morally relevant facts about individuals' circumstances that hypothetical positions of ignorance systematically obscure.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Indexing to actual standpoints avoids the arbitrariness problem: different ignorance constructions yield different principles, undermining objectivity.
      ?

      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.