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
    There are absolute constraints on the subjective ends we ... — Carmelics
    Home/Moral Responsibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    There are absolute constraints on the subjective ends we may set, the means we may use, and how we may treat persons.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Persons are ends in themselves.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.An end in itself functions as a limit, analogous to how the end of a road limits travel.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Moral constraints derive their force from consequences for welfare, not from the intrinsic status of persons as ends.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.When treating a person as a means produces outcomes that maximally respect all persons' welfare, the constraint against such treatment loses its absolute force.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Mill's harm principle and utilitarian aggregation provide a coherent framework for moral limits without invoking inviolable categorical prohibitions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kant's analogy between persons as ends and spatial limits commits a category error: persons are agents with dynamic, revisable ends, not fixed termini.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Bernard Williams argued that integrity-based constraints on action derive from an agent's own deep commitments, not from abstract universal limits on all agents equally.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If constraints are grounded in the particularity of individual projects and relationships, they are agent-relative and defeasible, not absolute and universal.
      ?

      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

    Moral ResponsibilityRights & Liberty

    Connections

    1 topic

    Virtue Ethics2 linked

    Related

    An end in itself functions as a limit, analogous to how the end of a road limits...Bernard Williams argued that integrity-based constraints on action derive from a...If constraints are grounded in the particularity of individual projects and rela...Kant's analogy between persons as ends and spatial limits commits a category err...
    +4 moreShow less
    Mill's harm principle and utilitarian aggregation provide a coherent framework f...Moral constraints derive their force from consequences for welfare, not from the...Persons are ends in themselves.When treating a person as a means produces outcomes that maximally respect all p...

    Similar

    Respect acknowledges constraints on our treatment of persons rather th...82%To be an end in itself is to impose an absolute limit on how one may b...79%Such a restriction means actual persons will not be willing to comply ...79%If the psychological realist constraint is relative to people's actual...79%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: respect
    View source passageHide passage
    To act for the sake of persons as ends in themselves, to respect them, is not to pursue or promote them, but to value them as the unconditionally valuable beings they are. It is also to acknowledge that there are constraints on our treatment of persons, for to be an end in itself is also to be a limit--just as the end of the road puts a limit on our travels, so an end in itself puts an absolute limit on the subjective ends we may set, the means we may use to pursue them, and, very importantly, o
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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