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
    The demand for an external ultimate standard conflates th... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Any adequate theory of value must postulate some ultimate end outside of practice as a standard against which the value of acts as means can be judged.

    The demand for an external ultimate standard conflates the logical structure of justification with the actual deliberative structure of moral reasoning.

    ?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.Moral agents actually deliberate through contextual reasoning, emotional responses, and social practices—not by consulting abstract logical hierarchies.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Confusing how we justify beliefs in theory (logical structures) with how we actually form them (deliberative processes) leads to demanding things justification doesn't require.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If moral reasoning were truly dependent on an external ultimate standard, moral competence would require explicit awareness of it—yet agents reason well without this.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The distinction between logical structure and deliberative structure doesn't eliminate the problem—even deliberative processes need some standard to distinguish good reasoning from bad.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.That we don't consciously consult ultimate standards doesn't prove they don't exist or aren't necessary; agents also don't consciously invoke logical rules while thinking.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Without external standards, there's no principled way to resolve moral disagreements or explain why some deliberative processes yield objective truths while others yield illusions.
      ?

      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

    Any adequate theory of value must postulate some ultimate end outside of practic...Confusing how we justify beliefs in theory (logical structures) with how we actu...If moral reasoning were truly dependent on an external ultimate standard, moral ...Moral agents actually deliberate through contextual reasoning, emotional respons...
    +3 moreShow less
    That we don't consciously consult ultimate standards doesn't prove they don't ex...The distinction between logical structure and deliberative structure doesn't eli...Without external standards, there's no principled way to resolve moral disagreem...

    Details

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