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
    Strategic action to avoid egalitarian duties to needy peo... — Carmelics
    Home/Moral Responsibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Strategic action to avoid egalitarian duties to needy people seems permissible if those duties arise solely from cooperative participation.

    Justice & PunishmentMoral Responsibility
    ?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.Egalitarian duties to needy people arise only because the needy participate in a scheme of cooperation with the non-needy.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the basis of a duty is contingent participation in a cooperative scheme, then removing oneself from that scheme removes the duty.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.What is avoidable by permissible action is itself permissible to avoid.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Duties of distributive justice can arise from shared subjection to coercive state institutions, not merely voluntary cooperative participation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Withdrawal from cooperative schemes rarely extricates agents from the coercive political structures Rawls identifies as the primary basis of justice.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Strategic exit designed to shed justice obligations constitutes a form of free-riding that itself violates the fair terms of social cooperation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Basic human needs generate moral claims on others independently of institutional or cooperative relationships, as argued by O'Neill and Pogge in cosmopolitan traditions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A duty whose avoidability renders it permissible to avoid cannot serve the action-guiding function that distinguishes genuine moral obligations from mere preferences.
      ?

      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

    Moral ResponsibilityJustice & Punishment

    Connections

    2 topics

    Social Contract2 linkedRights & Liberty1 linked

    Related

    A duty whose avoidability renders it permissible to avoid cannot serve the actio...Basic human needs generate moral claims on others independently of institutional...Duties of distributive justice can arise from shared subjection to coercive stat...Egalitarian duties to needy people arise only because the needy participate in a...
    +4 moreShow less
    If the basis of a duty is contingent participation in a cooperative scheme, then...Strategic exit designed to shed justice obligations constitutes a form of free-r...What is avoidable by permissible action is itself permissible to avoid.

    Similar

    Egalitarian duties to needy people arise only because the needy partic...84%Special obligations direct additional benefits toward intimates withou...76%'Real' altruism requires the conscious intention to help.76%If the basis of a duty is contingent participation in a cooperative sc...76%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: egalitarianism
    View source passageHide passage
    This line of thought prompts several questions. If stringent egalitarian duties to needy people arise only because the needy participate in a scheme of cooperation with the non-needy, then strategic action to avoid the duties seems permissible. If the rich separate from the poor and form their own distinct political communities, the reciprocity argument will no longer support the claim that the rich have substantial obligations to the poor. One might question whether genuine justice obligations
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

    Withdrawal from cooperative schemes rarely extricates agents from the coercive p...
    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit