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 The badness of an outcome is not simply the sum of individual badnesses, as Parfit's 'Repugnant Conclusion' reveals aggregation produces morally absurd results.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Rejecting aggregation requires explaining what non-additive principle determines badness—most alternatives face their own counterintuitive conclusions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If outcomes aren't determined by individual wellbeing sums, we lack a clear foundation for comparing welfare states or guiding policy decisions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The Repugnant Conclusion's absurdity may reflect our limited intuitions about large numbers rather than genuine logical failure of aggregation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.A world with billions living barely-worthwhile lives seems worse than one with fewer people living excellently, contradicting pure aggregation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Moral intuitions about fairness and individual dignity suggest we cannot trade off everyone's wellbeing equally for marginal population gains.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Pure aggregation implies we should create vast populations at subsistence level, which conflicts with reasonable constraints on procreative obligations.
      ?

      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.