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 Wertheimer's baseline problem in discrimination theory holds that we must distinguish between making someone worse off than a just baseline versus failing to correct a pre-existing injustice caused by other agents.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Identifying a 'just baseline' is itself deeply contested; competing theories of justice produce incompatible baselines, making the distinction practically unstable.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Benefiting from historical injustices creates ongoing obligations regardless of who caused them, so the baseline distinction can obscure systemic complicity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The distinction allows privileged groups to avoid corrective action by claiming victims are merely 'failing to reach' some hypothetical baseline rather than owed restitution.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Moral agency requires distinguishing between actively harming someone and passively allowing harm, since these involve different causal responsibilities.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Without a baseline distinction, every failure to help becomes equivalent to active harm, making ordinary people responsible for all global injustices.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Just baselines provide necessary reference points for assessing whether policies are corrective versus redistributive, clarifying distinct moral obligations.
      ?

      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.