Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that The 'best interests' standard presupposes a determinate future self whose interests can be known prior to the interventions that partly constitute that self.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
We can reliably predict general human flourishing patterns (health, autonomy, relationships) across diverse life trajectories.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
The claim conflates epistemological uncertainty about preferences with metaphysical indeterminacy of the future self itself.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
If no intervention could ever serve anyone's interests due to this circularity, the standard becomes pragmatically vacuous and self-defeating.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Identity is partly constituted by prior interventions, making future preferences partially unknowable before those interventions occur.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
The 'best interests' standard requires knowing what a future self will want, but interventions shape preferences themselves.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
We cannot access a self independent of formative influences to determine its 'true' interests objectively.
?
How convincing is this?
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.