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
    Tossing a coin is the only principle that guarantees ever... — Carmelics
    Home/Justice & Punishment
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→The contractually justified principle in the five-versus-one rescue case is to toss a coin

    Tossing a coin is the only principle that guarantees every one of the six people at least a fifty-fifty chance of survival

    Justice & PunishmentSocial Contract
    ?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

    Justice & PunishmentSocial Contract

    Connections

    1 topic

    Moral Responsibility2 linked

    Related

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Justice & Punishment
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    A principle is contractually valid if and only if no one can reasonably reject i...No individual among the six can reasonably reject a coin toss on the grounds tha...The contractually justified principle in the five-versus-one rescue case is to t...

    Similar

    No individual among the six can reasonably reject a coin toss on the g...84%The lone person can object to a principle permitting you to save the f...73%Each of the five people can object to a principle permitting you to sa...73%The contractually justified principle in the five-versus-one rescue ca...72%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: contractualism
    View source passageHide passage
    Suppose you decide to save the lone swimmer on the second rock. Intuitively, this seems wrong. Surely you should have saved five people instead of one. The challenge for contractualism is to explain why what you did is wrong. Utilitarians have a straightforward answer, based on aggregation. You should save the five people instead of the one simply because five deaths is a worse result than one death. This case is tricky for contractualism because it rejects aggregation. The five people will each

    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