Difference between revisions of "Permissibility and Presumption"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Overview == | == Overview == | ||
=== Description === | |||
=== Theoretical vs Substantive Warrants === | |||
== Presumption == | == Presumption == | ||
=== Description === | |||
=== Presumption Affirms === | |||
=== Presumption Negates === | |||
== Permissibility == | == Permissibility == | ||
=== Description === | |||
Permissibility is a common argument in philosophy (phil) debates. The central claim of permissibility arguments is that there is a moral 'middle ground' between an action being obligatory and prohibited. Permissibility occurs when a moral agent can choose whether or not to do an action and retain their moral status regardless of their choice. Essentially, permissibility is what you ''can'' do as opposed to what you must or cannot. Debaters often argue that permissibility either 'affirms' or 'negates.' Some affirmative arguments claim that ought statements are modal, and therefore to disprove an 'ought' you must prove a prohibition true. Alternatively, negative arguments generally revolve around the definition of the word 'ought.' | Permissibility is a common argument in philosophy (phil) debates. The central claim of permissibility arguments is that there is a moral 'middle ground' between an action being obligatory and prohibited. Permissibility occurs when a moral agent can choose whether or not to do an action and retain their moral status regardless of their choice. Essentially, permissibility is what you ''can'' do as opposed to what you must or cannot. Debaters often argue that permissibility either 'affirms' or 'negates.' Some affirmative arguments claim that ought statements are modal, and therefore to disprove an 'ought' you must prove a prohibition true. Alternatively, negative arguments generally revolve around the definition of the word 'ought.' | ||
=== Permissibility Affirms === | |||
=== Permissibility Negates === | |||
Revision as of 03:20, 10 January 2022
Overview
Description
Theoretical vs Substantive Warrants
Presumption
Description
Presumption Affirms
Presumption Negates
Permissibility
Description
Permissibility is a common argument in philosophy (phil) debates. The central claim of permissibility arguments is that there is a moral 'middle ground' between an action being obligatory and prohibited. Permissibility occurs when a moral agent can choose whether or not to do an action and retain their moral status regardless of their choice. Essentially, permissibility is what you can do as opposed to what you must or cannot. Debaters often argue that permissibility either 'affirms' or 'negates.' Some affirmative arguments claim that ought statements are modal, and therefore to disprove an 'ought' you must prove a prohibition true. Alternatively, negative arguments generally revolve around the definition of the word 'ought.'