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 Aristotelian conflation of the good life for the agen... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Virtuous action is grounded in the highest end for a human being.

    The Aristotelian conflation of the good life for the agent with the ground of right action commits a systematic equivocation between agent-relative and agent-neutral value.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Agent-relative value (what benefits me) and agent-neutral value (what is objectively right) operate on different logical foundations.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Aristotle derives obligations from eudaimonia, but eudaimonia is inherently agent-centered, making it unsuitable as a ground for universal duties.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Confusing personal flourishing with moral rightness allows one to rationalize self-interested acts as ethically justified.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Aristotle's eudaimonia includes virtue as essential, and virtues like justice are inherently agent-neutral in their demands and scope.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The distinction between agent-relative and agent-neutral value is itself contestable; flourishing may not reduce to mere self-interest.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Modern virtue ethics successfully uses eudaimonia as a foundation for objective moral requirements without equivocation.
      ?

      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.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Consequentialism1 linkedVirtue Ethics1 linked

    Related

    Agent-relative value (what benefits me) and agent-neutral value (what is objecti...Aristotle derives obligations from eudaimonia, but eudaimonia is inherently agen...Aristotle's eudaimonia includes virtue as essential, and virtues like justice ar...Confusing personal flourishing with moral rightness allows one to rationalize se...
    +3 moreShow less
    Modern virtue ethics successfully uses eudaimonia as a foundation for objective ...The distinction between agent-relative and agent-neutral value is itself contest...Virtuous action is grounded in the highest end for a human being.

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit