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
    These distinctions cannot be captured by a framework that... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Moral Responsibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→A complete ethics of risk must distinguish between intentional and unintentional risk exposure, and between voluntary risk-taking, accepted imposed risks, and non-accepted imposed risks.

    These distinctions cannot be captured by a framework that treats risks solely as probabilistic mixtures of outcomes.

    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

    Connections

    2 topics

    Rights & Liberty1 linked

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Moral Responsibility
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Justice & Punishment
    1 linked

    Related

    A complete ethics of risk must distinguish between intentional and unintentional...Moral analysis of risk requires attending to the mental states of the risk-impos...Moral analysis of risk requires attending to whether the person exposed to risk ...

    Similar

    Even a maximally expansive probabilistic outcomes framework cannot cap...82%Therefore, the moral significance of imposing risk itself — independen...80%A probabilistic outcomes framework, even when outcomes are defined to ...78%A probability calculus treats actions as probabilistic mixtures of out...76%

    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