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 There is a moral objection to indulging one's own desires at another person's expense, even if the timeless harmony never becomes manifest in time.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The identity of individuals with the Absolute is not established by argument but assumed, making the moral objection circular.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Bradley's and Bosanquet's absolute idealism was decisively criticized by Russell and Moore for conflating numerical and qualitative identity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Without a defensible metaphysics of the Absolute, the alleged harm to a 'larger whole' has no ontological ground to generate moral obligations.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Schopenhauer argues that compassion, not metaphysical unity, grounds the moral prohibition against harming others at one's own expense.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the moral objection holds independently of any timeless harmony ever becoming manifest, the Absolutist metaphysics is doing no genuine moral work.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A Humean sentimentalist can account for the same moral prohibition through sympathy without invoking an unverifiable supra-individual self.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.All individuals are aspects of the Absolute, a timeless super-self.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Harming another person is harming a larger whole of which both oneself and the other person are parts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The same objection that applies to indulging one passion at the expense of other inconsistent passions within oneself applies to indulging one's desires at another person's expense.
      ?

      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.