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 distinction between 'mere calculation' and 'genuine a... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→A judgment that merely follows a rule is only 'right,' not 'just'

    The distinction between 'mere calculation' and 'genuine adjudication' collapses if every competent application of a rule already involves irreducible normative discretion.

    ?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.Rule-following requires interpreting semantic content, which always admits multiple reasonable readings given finite examples.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Even mechanical computation depends on judgments about what counts as a 'correct application' in context.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If discretion is irreducible at every competent application, the calculation/adjudication distinction marks no real difference in kind.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Discretion in interpretation differs fundamentally from discretion in choosing among permissible outcomes after correct rule application.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Some rule applications are determinate and non-controversial (2+2=4), showing not all competent application requires normative discretion.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The collapse claim proves too much: it conflates unavoidable interpretive judgment with genuine normative choice.
      ?

      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

    Philosophy of Language1 linkedJustice & Punishment1 linked

    Related

    A judgment that merely follows a rule is only 'right,' not 'just'Discretion in interpretation differs fundamentally from discretion in choosing a...Even mechanical computation depends on judgments about what counts as a 'correct...If discretion is irreducible at every competent application, the calculation/adj...
    +3 moreShow less
    Rule-following requires interpreting semantic content, which always admits multi...Some rule applications are determinate and non-controversial (2+2=4), showing no...The collapse claim proves too much: it conflates unavoidable interpretive judgme...

    Details

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