Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that The wrongness of severing intimate relationships is grounded in the relational interests of both parties, not mere causal or biological connection.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Relational interests themselves may derive from biological/causal bonds; grounding wrongness in interests doesn't exclude biology.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Parents cannot fully consent to or revoke obligations toward dependent children, yet most believe abandonment remains deeply wrong.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
If wrongness requires mutual relational interests, one-sided love or commitment becomes morally irrelevant, which seems incomplete.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Moral obligations arise from what parties actually value and consent to, not from natural facts alone.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Two people can share biology yet lack relational interests; conversely, unrelated people can develop deep mutual interests.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
If wrongness tracked mere biology, surrogacy and adoption would be as morally fraught as abandonment, which most reject.
?
How convincing is this?
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.