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 T.M. Scanlon's buck-passing account grounds blame in the judgment that an agent's will impairs reasons for attitudes—a purely normative relation independent of personal history.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Personal history shapes what reasons an agent actually had and could access; ignoring it treats agents as decontextualized will-bearers.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Blame practices inherently concern whether an agent should have known and cared about violated norms—facts historically and socially embedded.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Pure normative relations cannot explain why we blame some reason-impairing acts but not others without invoking prior judgments about agency.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Blame grounded in reasons is more objective than blame based on emotional reactions or personal relationships to the wrongdoer.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If blame depends on personal history, identical actions warrant different blame based on agent biography, undermining principled judgment.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Normative relations like 'impairs reasons' are mind-independent facts that can justify blame without circular appeal to blame itself.
      ?

      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.