PsyArXiv
metadata only
Recognizing fallacies in deontological arguments
Deontological arguments are those involving rules that refer to properties of actions other than their consequences, e.g., vaccination, act vs.\ omission. These arguments are often used to justify public policies. In principle, some of them could make outcomes worse than the outcomes of utilitarian
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Binary Act Consequentialism#114579
- Act and Rule Consequentialism: A Synthesis#80277
- Consequentialism: Core and Expansion#699454
- The Verdict’s Office#695988
- Argumentation: A Brief Introduction#716560
Record · ID 1300247
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive