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 causal independence test in P2 conflates causal suffi... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→On the patient-centered libertarian deontological view, switching the trolley to save five workers at the cost of one is permissible even if the agent intends to kill the one worker.

    The causal independence test in P2 conflates causal sufficiency with moral use: the one worker's presence on the track is a necessary enabling condition for the redirected threat.

    ?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.Necessary conditions are distinct from sufficient conditions; conflating them obscures whether an agent causally determines an outcome.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A worker's mere presence doesn't guarantee the trolley diverts to their track; additional conditions (track functionality, lever operation) are required.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Moral permissibility shouldn't depend on whether someone happens to occupy a location; this conflates geography with causal agency.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Necessary conditions can ground moral responsibility; using someone as a means requires their essential participation, whether sufficient or not.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The distinction between necessary and sufficient conditions is less morally relevant than whether redirecting uses that worker's presence instrumentally.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Diverting the threat to an occupied track necessarily treats that worker's body as the instrument stopping the trolley—their necessity makes this clearer.
      ?

      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

    1 topic

    Consequentialism1 linked

    Related

    A worker's mere presence doesn't guarantee the trolley diverts to their track; a...Diverting the threat to an occupied track necessarily treats that worker's body ...Moral permissibility shouldn't depend on whether someone happens to occupy a loc...Necessary conditions are distinct from sufficient conditions; conflating them ob...
    +3 moreShow less
    Necessary conditions can ground moral responsibility; using someone as a means r...On the patient-centered libertarian deontological view, switching the trolley to...The distinction between necessary and sufficient conditions is less morally rele...

    Details

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