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 Obligation Distribution Condition fails because conjunctive obligations do not distribute across conditionally dependent conjuncts.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.An obligation to (A∧B) is fundamentally a single obligation, not two separable ones; distribution applies only to logically independent objects.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Conditional dependence between conjuncts doesn't defeat distribution—it merely shows what each obligation requires given actual circumstances.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If we reject distribution for dependent conjuncts, we lack principled criteria for which conjunctions distribute, making the view unstable.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.If A's fulfillment changes what's required of B, then obligating (A∧B) doesn't entail separate obligations to A and to B.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Conditionally dependent conjuncts have their deontic status altered by their conjunct-partner's fulfillment, violating distribution.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Distribution assumes each conjunct retains its obligation independently; dependent conjuncts lack this independence by definition.
      ?

      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.