Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Treating someone as a responsible agent whose choices warrant deterrent responses presupposes, rather than negates, their status as an autonomous moral agent.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Deterrence focuses on future compliance through fear, which can override rational deliberation rather than presuppose it.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
We deter animals and non-autonomous systems effectively; deterrent systems don't require or assume genuine moral agency.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Presupposing autonomy and actually respecting it are distinct; deterrence can instrumentally use agents without honoring their status.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Deterrence treats violations of norms as meaningful choices, implying the agent could have done otherwise—core to autonomy.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Only beings capable of rational deliberation can be deterred; applying deterrence therefore presupposes rational agency.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Respecting autonomy requires holding agents accountable for choices; accountability through consequences affirms their moral status.
?
How convincing is this?
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.