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
    The absence of pleasure for A constitutes a genuine loss,... — Carmelics
    Home/Moral Responsibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Monism can account for rational regret in value choice by appealing to different bearers of value.

    The absence of pleasure for A constitutes a genuine loss, even when the better option is chosen.

    ConsequentialismMoral Responsibility
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

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

    Topics

    Moral ResponsibilityConsequentialism

    Connections

    1 topic

    Justice & Punishment1 linked

    Related

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Moral Responsibility
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    A genuine loss provides rational grounds for regret.In a choice between giving five units of pleasure to A and ten units of pleasure...Monism can account for rational regret in value choice by appealing to different...This pattern generalizes: whenever the superior option contributes value via one...

    Similar

    A genuine loss provides rational grounds for regret.77%A sum of pleasures is not itself a pleasure.76%In a choice between giving five units of pleasure to A and ten units o...76%The only explanation for W1 being preferable to W2 (given equal pleasu...75%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: value-pluralism
    View source passageHide passage
    One way for monists to make sense of complexity in value choice is to point out that there are different bearers of value, and this makes a big difference to the experience of choice. (See Hurka, 1996; Schaber, 1999; Klocksiem 2011). Here is the challenge to monism in Michael Stocker’s words (Stocker, 1990, p. 272): “[if monism is true] there is no ground for rational conflict because the better option lacks nothing that would be made good by the lesser.” In other words, there are no relevant di

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective