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 We can confidently infer the reality of our noumenal freedom to choose to do whatever morality requires
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
2 perspectives
Reason for 1 of 2
?
1.
The phenomenology of moral obligation is compatible with being a deterministic system that feels compelled rather than free.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Hume demonstrated that the felt sense of 'ought' arises from sentiment and social conditioning, not evidence of a noumenal self.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Therefore, the immediate awareness of obligation cannot serve as evidence for a metaphysically distinct freedom beyond the causal order.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reason for 2 of 2
?
1.
'Ought implies can' establishes only that practical deliberation presupposes ability, not that a noumenal self actually possesses libertarian freedom.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Kant's inference from the practical postulate of freedom to its metaphysical reality commits a transcendental illusion he elsewhere explicitly warns against.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
We have an immediate awareness of our obligation under the moral law
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
If we ought to do something, then we must be able to do it (ought implies can)
?
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.