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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that The parent-child analogy (P3) fails because parental duties derive from voluntary procreative acts and dependency, not mere affection or mutual choice.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Parents often report that affection and mutual choice generate obligations equal to or exceeding those from procreation itself—a common experience the claim dismisses.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Adoptive parents have identical parental duties despite lacking procreative acts, suggesting duty-source is not procreation but the relationship itself.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Voluntary assumption of risk explains many duties, but dependency plus relationship recognition may be sufficient; procreation may be neither necessary nor sufficient.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Procreation is a voluntary act that causally creates dependency; this causal responsibility grounds duties in ways mutual affection alone cannot.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Duties based on voluntary assumption of risk (procreation) are categorically different from duties based on emotional preference or contract.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Children's vulnerability and inability to consent creates asymmetrical obligations that affection-based relationships don't explain or justify.
      ?

      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.
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42