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 generalist reading of 'that is stealing, and therefor... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Moral Responsibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The generalist reading of 'that is stealing, and therefore you should not do it' implicitly appeals to a principle

    Moral ResponsibilityPhilosophy of Language
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.The fully specified generalist reading is: 'that is stealing and stealing is always wrong; therefore that is wrong'
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.This reading introduces a silent appeal to a principle—either absolute or contributory
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The presence of such a principle means what is expressed is a genuine inference with premises and a conclusion
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Wittgenstein's rule-following considerations show that citing a rule in reasoning does not entail the rule is doing the inferential work.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The word 'stealing' already encodes normative force via thick ethical concepts, making the generalist premise redundant rather than implicit.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A speaker can competently deploy 'therefore' between two moral claims without committing to any universal principle connecting them.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Ryle's distinction between knowing-that and knowing-how shows moral inference can be a trained skill rather than the application of stored propositional principles.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The 'silent premise' move in reconstructing arguments (per Toulmin's critique of syllogistic models) smuggles in logical form that need not reflect the speaker's actual commitments.
      ?

      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.

    Topics

    Moral ResponsibilityPhilosophy of Language

    Connections

    1 topic

    Truth & Knowledge1 linked

    Related

    A speaker can competently deploy 'therefore' between two moral claims without co...Ryle's distinction between knowing-that and knowing-how shows moral inference ca...The 'silent premise' move in reconstructing arguments (per Toulmin's critique of...The fully specified generalist reading is: 'that is stealing and stealing is alw...
    +4 moreShow less
    The presence of such a principle means what is expressed is a genuine inference ...The word 'stealing' already encodes normative force via thick ethical concepts, ...This reading introduces a silent appeal to a principle—either absolute or contri...Wittgenstein's rule-following considerations show that citing a rule in reasonin...

    Similar

    The fully specified generalist reading is: 'that is stealing and steal...86%The particularist reads 'that is stealing and therefore it is wrong' a...79%The statement 'that is stealing and therefore it is wrong' is not an a...78%Mill's harm principle is fundamentally concerned with non-consensual h...70%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: moral-particularism
    View source passageHide passage
    Finally, in this section, how does the particularist understand someone who says ‘that is stealing, and therefore you should not do it’? One way of understanding what is said here is as an abbreviated argument, which fully specified reads ‘that is stealing and stealing is always wrong; therefore that is wrong’. This reading introduces silent appeal to a principle—either absolute or contributory, according to one’s way of understanding ‘that is wrong’. And it suggests that what we have here is re
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit