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
    The restrictive motivational-set conception of public rea... — Carmelics
    Home/Bioethics
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The restrictive motivational-set conception of public reasons implies that virtually no public health measures could ever be considered legitimate.

    BioethicsDemocracy & Governance
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    2 reasons for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Gaus's 'restrictive motivational-set' requires policies be justifiable from within each citizen's actual values, not idealized rational ones.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Public health measures routinely invoke aggregate welfare gains that are incommensurable with liberty-centered or religious value systems.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.No single epidemiological justification can simultaneously satisfy libertarian, communitarian, and religious motivational sets without remainder.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Rawls's own move to 'overlapping consensus' tacitly concedes that shared public reasons cannot be derived from actual motivational sets alone.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If even Rawls requires idealization to generate legitimate public reasons, the stricter motivational-set standard collapses nearly all coercive health mandates.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Public health policies are by design intended to affect large numbers of people.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.It is hard to imagine any public health policy compatible with the motivational set of every affected person.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.There will always be some individuals who object to a proposed policy because it is incompatible with their values.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    BioethicsDemocracy & Governance

    Connections

    1 topic

    Rights & Liberty1 linked

    Related

    Gaus's 'restrictive motivational-set' requires policies be justifiable from with...If even Rawls requires idealization to generate legitimate public reasons, the s...It is hard to imagine any public health policy compatible with the motivational ...No single epidemiological justification can simultaneously satisfy libertarian, ...
    +4 moreShow less
    Public health measures routinely invoke aggregate welfare gains that are incomme...Public health policies are by design intended to affect large numbers of people.Rawls's own move to 'overlapping consensus' tacitly concedes that shared public ...There will always be some individuals who object to a proposed policy because it...

    Similar

    A reason is public only if it is compatible with the motivational set ...81%It is hard to imagine any public health policy compatible with the mot...79%A soda tax is illegitimate under the restrictive motivational-set conc...77%Personal objection to a public health regulation is insufficient justi...76%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: publichealth-ethics
    View source passageHide passage
    Others, by contrast, argue for more restrictive conceptions of public reasons. For instance, one popular theory of public reason liberalism claims that a reason is public if and only if it is compatible with the ‘motivational set’ – which includes desires, dispositions of evaluation, and patterns of emotional reaction – of each (idealized) person (Bonotti and Barnhill 2019). Given that at least a few (idealized) people will have a motivational set that is incompatible with reasons offered in def
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (2 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit