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 epistemic argument for special obligations collapses ... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Utilitarianism, properly understood, can accommodate special obligations and personal concerns.

    The epistemic argument for special obligations collapses under conditions where impartial calculation is demonstrably more effective, such as effective altruism scenarios.

    ?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.If an epistemic justification for special obligations relies on superior knowledge of particular needs, that justification evaporates when impartial methods demonstrably achieve better outcomes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Effective altruism provides empirical evidence that maximizing aggregate welfare through calculation often surpasses outcomes from agent-centered special duties.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Epistemic arguments cannot justify obligations whose actual consequences are measurably worse than available alternatives.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Special obligations may have non-epistemic foundations (relational, contractual, or deontological) that survive regardless of comparative effectiveness in particular domains.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Effective altruism's demonstrated success in some scenarios doesn't establish it as universally superior—many domains involve radical uncertainty where calculation fails.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The claim conflates epistemic justification for obligations with causal effectiveness; an obligation can remain epistemically sound even if impartial action sometimes produces better outcomes.
      ?

      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 linkedMoral Responsibility1 linked

    Related

    Effective altruism provides empirical evidence that maximizing aggregate welfare...Effective altruism's demonstrated success in some scenarios doesn't establish it...Epistemic arguments cannot justify obligations whose actual consequences are mea...If an epistemic justification for special obligations relies on superior knowled...
    +3 moreShow less
    Special obligations may have non-epistemic foundations (relational, contractual,...The claim conflates epistemic justification for obligations with causal effectiv...Utilitarianism, properly understood, can accommodate special obligations and per...

    Details

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