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 Without a deep self/other distinction, the separateness of persons objection cannot generate a principled asymmetry between aggregating welfare within a life and aggregating welfare across lives.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Psychological continuity and narrative unity within a life create real asymmetries even without metaphysically deep selves, justifying intra-life aggregation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The separateness of persons objection relies on epistemic/practical distinctness of persons, not metaphysical depth—these survive without deep selves.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Functional differences between integrated lifespans and disconnected persons ground asymmetries independently of whether selves are fundamentally deep.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.If persons lack metaphysically deep boundaries, the intuition supporting asymmetry between intra-life and inter-life aggregation loses its foundation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Aggregating welfare across time within a life and across distinct lives are structurally identical operations if no fundamental self/other distinction exists.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Without deep personhood distinctions, rejecting cross-life aggregation while accepting intra-life aggregation appears arbitrary rather than principled.
      ?

      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.