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 inference from 'Act A is a lie' to 'Act A is wrong' is criterial evidence, not causal or standard inductive evidence.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Moral realists like Cornell realists (Sturgeon, Boyd) hold that moral properties are natural properties with genuine causal efficacy.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If wrongness supervenes on natural properties that have causal roles, the inference from 'lie' to 'wrong' tracks causal-explanatory relations.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A criterial/causal distinction presupposes non-naturalism, which is a substantive metaethical commitment, not a neutral logical observation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Hume and his empiricist heirs argue that moral inference requires empirical grounding in human sentiments and social consequences.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If 'lying is wrong' derives its normative force from regularities about harm and trust-violation, the inference is partly inductive in character.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Beardsley's criterial model conflates the epistemic role of moral concepts with their semantic content, as Mackie's error theory would expose.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Lying does not cause wrongness.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The inference from 'Act A is a lie' to 'Act A is wrong' is not grounded in any empirical generalization about lies.
      ?

      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.