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 line of argument that there are unlikely to be many unknown goodmaking properties is not especially promising.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Moral epistemology has a strong track record: historically, humans have systematically discovered new morally relevant properties (e.g., sentience in animals, autonomy rights).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If moral discovery is ongoing and non-arbitrary, inductive reasoning supports expecting further unknown goodmaking properties rather than a near-complete moral ontology.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore, the claim that unknown goodmaking properties are likely few is defeated by the empirical pattern of expanding moral knowledge.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.G.E. Moore's open question argument entails that goodmaking properties are not reducible to natural properties, making their enumeration in principle unbounded.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the space of possible goodmaking properties is non-naturalistic and open-ended, no principled argument can establish that known properties are near-exhaustive.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.If the number of unknown goodmaking properties is small, the probability of Q may still be high even if Q does not express a law or a consequence of a law.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.It may well be possible to argue that it is unlikely that there are many unknown, morally relevant properties.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Any attempt to establish that conclusion would very likely involve very controversial metaethical claims.
      ?

      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.