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 dogmatism of traditional philosophical ethics is folly because it hobbles moral progress.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Traditional philosophical ethics uses a priori, dialectical methods to determine the good and the right.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Such methods cannot adequately test value judgments against experience and consequences.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Moral progress requires the ability to revise value judgments in light of new evidence and consequences.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Historical moral progress (e.g., abolition, expanded suffrage) resulted from experiential challenges to entrenched a priori norms, not from within deductive systems.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Kant's categorical imperative and Aristotle's natural teleology both historically rationalized slavery and gender subordination, demonstrating that fixed first principles resist corrective revision.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A moral framework that cannot be falsified by consequences is epistemically equivalent to dogma, regardless of its internal logical coherence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Dewey's experimental ethics treats moral principles as working hypotheses, subject to revision when their consequences fail to resolve genuine human problems.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Mill's own revisions to utilitarianism—introducing qualitative distinctions between pleasures—demonstrate that even consequentialist progress requires departing from rigid first principles.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A framework that generates hypotheses, tests them against lived experience, and revises them accordingly possesses greater adaptive capacity than one anchored to fixed categorical imperatives.
      ?

      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.