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 Utilitarianism, properly understood, can accommodate special obligations and personal concerns.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Special obligations derive their moral force from relationships of commitment and trust, not from instrumental efficiency calculations.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.When a parent cares for their child because doing so maximizes utility, they fail to honor the relationship itself as morally fundamental.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Bernard Williams's integrity objection shows that reducing personal commitments to utility-maximizing strategies alienates agents from the very projects that constitute their identity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The epistemic argument for special obligations collapses under conditions where impartial calculation is demonstrably more effective, such as effective altruism scenarios.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A moral theory that grounds special obligations only in contingent causal efficiency provides no obligation when technology or institutions make global impact more tractable than local care.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Genuine special obligations must remain binding even when violating them would produce marginally better aggregate outcomes, which utilitarianism structurally cannot guarantee.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Individual knowledge of others and causal power to do good are limited to those near and dear and regular associates.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Given these limits, individuals produce better overall outcomes by focusing on associates rather than the world at large.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Focusing on associates generates outcomes that resemble the special obligations critics of utilitarianism invoke.
      ?

      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.