Two Conceptions of Reasons for Action

Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 62 (2):447-453 (2001)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

On a ‘comparative’ conception of practical reasons, reasons are like ‘weights’ that can make an action more or less rational. Bernard Gert adopts instead a ‘toggle’ conception of practical reasons: something counts as a reason just in case it alone can make some or other otherwise irrational action rational. I suggest that Gert’s conception suffers from various defects, and that his motivation for adopting this conception – his central claim that actions can be rational without there being reasons for them – does not require adoption of the toggle conception. The more intuitive comparative conception of reasons for action can accommodate the insight.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 100,290

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The Problem of Expressive Action.Christopher Bennett - 2021 - Philosophy 96 (2):277-300.
Realism, Rational Action, and the Humean Theory of Motivation.Melissa Barry - 2007 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 10 (3):231-242.
Naturalizing the space of reasons.Bill Pollard - 2005 - International Journal of Philosophical Studies 13 (1):69 – 82.
Rational Requirements and 'Rational' Akrasia.Edward S. Hinchman - 2013 - Philosophical Studies 166 (3):529-552.
Foundationalism and practical reason.Joseph Heath - 1997 - Mind 106 (423):451-474.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
890 (#24,690)

6 months
81 (#74,392)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Ruth Chang
University of Oxford

Citations of this work

Why cognitivism?Yair Levy - 2017 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 48 (2):223-244.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references