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
    Some necessary evils may be tolerated without being moral... — Carmelics
    Home/Forgiveness & Mercy
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Some necessary evils may be tolerated without being morally approved or endorsed by gospel teaching

    Forgiveness & MercyProblem of Evil
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Tolerating a lesser evil can prevent a greater evil
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Tolerance of an evil is distinct from approval or endorsement of that evil
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Institutional tolerance of evil, especially by religious authority, functions as tacit moral endorsement in the eyes of those subject to that authority.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Erasmus's distinction between tolerance and approval collapses when the tolerating agent has a prophetic obligation to actively oppose evil, as Aquinas held of religious leaders.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kant's categorical imperative demands that moral agents never treat persons as mere means, making systemic tolerance of evils that instrumentalize persons impermissible regardless of consequentialist benefits.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A 'necessary evil' framing presupposes a consequentialist calculus that gospel ethics, rooted in deontological commands, does not permit as a justificatory framework.
      ?

      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.

    Topics

    Forgiveness & MercyProblem of Evil

    Notable Defenders

    PlatoancientReferenced by Erasmus on the philosopher-ruler ideal
    James D. TracycontemporaryTracy 1978
    John O'MalleycontemporaryCWE 66: xix
    Desiderius ErasmusmodernCWE 27: 231, 236, 284
    ErasmusmodernColloquies: "Inquiry into Faith" and "The Godly Feast"
    ErasmusmodernDe Pueris Instituendis (1529); Institutio Principis Christiani (1516); CWE 26: 295
    ErasmusmodernCWE 41: 415; CWE 66: xix
    ErasmusmodernLetter to Jan Slechta, 1519
    Erasmusmodern
    ErasmusmodernInstitutio Principis Christiani (1516); Panegyricus (1504); Querela Pacis (1517); De Bello Turcico (1530); De Sarcienda Ecclesiae Concordia (1533)

    Connections

    3 topics

    Consequentialism1 linkedJustice & Punishment1 linkedMoral Responsibility1 linked

    Related

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: erasmus
    View source passageHide passage
    We should not propagate the Christian religion only with arms, nor should princes undertake war when it can be avoided by using other means. They should, moreover, conduct a war they have undertaken with a minimum of bloodshed and end it as quickly as possible. Finally, [war] is not compatible with the purity of the gospel, and we must not seek to derive the right to go to war from gospel precepts…There are many necessary evils in human affairs, which are tolerated because they prevent greater e
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    A 'necessary evil' framing presupposes a consequentialist calculus that gospel e...Erasmus's distinction between tolerance and approval collapses when the tolerati...Institutional tolerance of evil, especially by religious authority, functions as...Kant's categorical imperative demands that moral agents never treat persons as m...
    +2 moreShow less
    Tolerance of an evil is distinct from approval or endorsement of that evilTolerating a lesser evil can prevent a greater evil

    Similar

    The doctrine that victims of natural evil are morally responsible for ...79%If other theodicies could provide a justification for God's allowing m...79%No other theodicy appears to provide a satisfactory justification for ...76%Such evils do not appear to result from morally wrong actions.75%
    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit