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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that The distinction between what an agent can do and what is done to an agent is a pre-theoretical condition for attributing moral responsibility, not a tool of inquiry.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Neuroscience reveals action/passivity at the neural level is often indeterminate; our folk distinction may require empirical refinement to be useful.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Edge cases (compulsion, manipulation, implicit bias) show the distinction is unstable without theoretical tools to clarify what counts as 'doing'.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Treating it as pre-theoretical prevents us from questioning whether the distinction carves nature at its joints or merely reflects outdated assumptions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Moral responsibility requires distinguishing agent causation from external causation, which is conceptually prior to any empirical investigation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.This distinction is intuitive across cultures and appears in folk psychology before formal moral theorizing, suggesting it is foundational.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Without this pre-theoretical distinction, we cannot coherently begin inquiry into responsibility; it enables rather than results from investigation.
      ?

      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.