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 wishes of EAS expressed in her advance directive ought to control decisions about FDS's life, even at the cost of FDS's good.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The interests of a currently existing person with present-tense experiences and welfare cannot be overridden by a prior self's preferences without independent justification.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.FDS, as a psychologically distinct subject with her own experiential states, possesses the morally relevant properties that ground welfare rights regardless of her R-relation to EAS.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Parfit's own framework entails that weak R-relatedness diminishes the authority of EAS over FDS, not merely FDS's claim to continuity with EAS—undermining rather than supporting advance directive enforcement.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Advance directives derive their authority from autonomy, but autonomy norms require that the directive-issuer and the person bound by it share sufficient psychological unity to constitute a single deliberating agent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.When dementia severs that psychological continuity, the advance directive functions not as self-determination but as one person's imposition on a numerically or practically distinct other, which standard liberal autonomy theory does not license.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Identity is not what matters for defining the scope of egoistic concern; what matters is Relation R (psychological continuity and connectedness).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.EAS is strongly R-related to most previous stages of her life but only weakly R-related to FDS, despite FDS being a later stage of the same life.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The part of the person's life most deeply prudentially unified is the larger, more dominant part of which EAS was a strongly R-related member.
      ?

      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.