Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that The moral arbitrariness of birthplace parallels the moral arbitrariness of race or sex as a basis for differential treatment (Rawls, extended).
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Birthplace determines membership in political communities with legitimate authority to set borders and allocate resources.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Race and sex are individual characteristics; birthplace defines collective sovereignty and contractual obligations between citizens.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Rawls himself limited justice principles to domestic institutions, not global distribution, recognizing this disanalogy.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Individuals cannot choose their birthplace, race, or sex; all are morally arbitrary assignments of circumstance.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Using morally arbitrary characteristics to distribute basic rights or opportunities violates equal respect for persons.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Global inequality based on birthplace mirrors how pre-civil rights societies justified hierarchy through immutable traits.
?
How convincing is this?
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.