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 claim conflates strong cosmopolitan egalitarianism with all global egalitarianism, thereby overstating the utopianism of globally-extended positions.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
The distinction between 'strong' and moderate global egalitarianism may be descriptively marginal if most theorists converge on similar redistributive implications.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Calling a position utopian requires clarifying whether utopianism concerns feasibility or ideals; the charge may confuse these separate critiques.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Even moderate global egalitarians face similar feasibility objections as strong cosmopolitans, so the distinction may not reduce the utopianism concern.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Strong cosmopolitan egalitarianism demands equal distribution globally; moderate positions accept priority for compatriots or non-ideal feasibility constraints.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Conflating distinct views obscures important disagreements about whether global justice requires complete equality or merely adequate minimum standards.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Many global egalitarians accept state sovereignty and national partiality, making them far less utopian than strong cosmopolitanism presupposes.
?
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.