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
    Therefore, the moral significance of imposing risk itself... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Moral Responsibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Even a maximally expansive probabilistic outcomes framework cannot capture the moral implications of risk-taking per se.

    Therefore, the moral significance of imposing risk itself — independent of which outcome obtains — falls outside the scope of any outcomes-based probabilistic framework.

    ConsequentialismMoral Responsibility
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Moral ResponsibilityConsequentialism

    Related

    A probabilistic outcomes framework, even when outcomes are defined to include ri...Even a maximally expansive probabilistic outcomes framework cannot capture the m...The moral implications of risk-taking per se are not inherent properties of any ...

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Moral Responsibility
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.

    Similar

    Even a maximally expansive probabilistic outcomes framework cannot cap...91%The moral implications of risk-taking per se are not inherent properti...87%The moral value of an action does not depend on mere chance or acciden...82%These distinctions cannot be captured by a framework that treats risks...80%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: risk
    View source passageHide passage
    Examples are easily found that exhibit the problematic nature of this division between the two disciplines. Compare the act of throwing down a brick on a person from a high building to the act of throwing down a brick from a high building without first making sure that there is nobody beneath who can be hit by the brick. The moral difference between these two acts is not obviously expressible in a probability calculus. An ethical analysis of the difference will have to refer to the moral aspects

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective