Campbell's Paradox and the Possibility Clause: The Guards of Infrastructuralism

This paper introduces two foundational safeguards, Campbell’s Paradox and The Possibility Clause, that defend and extend the normative ethical theory of Infrastructuralism. Campbell’s Paradox (“To morally disagree is to affirm that the conditions for moral judgment matter”) functions as a self-validating statement akin to Descartes’ Cogito, ergo sum (“I think, therefore I am”), demonstrating that moral disagreement itself presupposes the infrastructure required for moral reasoning. The Possibility Clause (“Survival is not good because it ensures good outcomes, it is good because it creates the very possibility of both good and bad”) grounds the intrinsic moral value of survival by showing that the possibility of good is more valuable than its impossibility, independent of outcome tallies. Together, these principles not only secure Infrastructuralism against collapse and misinterpretation, but also stand as independent philosophical contributions with potential application beyond the theory itself.