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 wrongness of an act 'in itself' requires a stable, no... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Within a nonconsequentialist approach to morality, terrorism is considered wrong in itself.

    The wrongness of an act 'in itself' requires a stable, non-contested description of what that act essentially is.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Moral properties must attach to something determinate; an act without a stable description lacks a clear subject for moral evaluation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Competing descriptions of the same act (e.g., 'killing' vs. 'self-defense') suggest the act's moral status is description-dependent, not intrinsic.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If an act's wrongness could be true under one description and false under another, wrongness would be relative to interpretation, not objective.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Descriptions of acts are always interpretive layers; no 'essential' act-description exists independent of an agent's perspective or context.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Wrongness can attach to multiple descriptions of the same act simultaneously (lying is wrong both as 'deception' and as 'breaking trust').
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Moral properties may be fundamentally relational (concerning intentions, consequences, or relationships) rather than tied to static act-essences.
      ?

      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.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Consequentialism1 linkedJustice & Punishment1 linked

    Related

    Competing descriptions of the same act (e.g., 'killing' vs. 'self-defense') sugg...Descriptions of acts are always interpretive layers; no 'essential' act-descript...If an act's wrongness could be true under one description and false under anothe...Moral properties may be fundamentally relational (concerning intentions, consequ...
    +3 moreShow less
    Moral properties must attach to something determinate; an act without a stable d...Within a nonconsequentialist approach to morality, terrorism is considered wrong...Wrongness can attach to multiple descriptions of the same act simultaneously (ly...

    Details

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