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 A rational agent's voluntary response to a reason cannot consist in behavior motivated by a desire caused by recognizing that reason

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Humans cannot desire at will
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If humans cannot desire at will, then the causation of a new desire by recognizing a reason is a nonvoluntary response
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Behavior motivated by a nonvoluntarily-caused desire does not qualify as a voluntary response to the reason that caused the desire, even if the behavior itself is voluntary
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kant's distinction between acting from duty and merely in accordance with duty shows that genuine rational agency requires the reason itself—not a desire it produces—to be the motivating ground.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If a desire mediates between the recognized reason and the behavior, the agent is ultimately responding to the desire's pull, not to the normative force of the reason as such.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Responding to the normative force of a reason as such is constitutive of rational agency in a way that desire-mediated responses structurally cannot be.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Korsgaard's constitutivism holds that rational agency requires the agent to reflectively endorse the source of motivation, not merely undergo a causal process triggered by reason-recognition.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A desire caused by recognizing a reason is a psychological event that happens to the agent, bypassing the reflective self-governance that distinguishes voluntary rational response from mere causal reaction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Because the desire is caused rather than constituted by the agent's deliberative endorsement, the resulting behavior traces back to a passively received state, undermining its status as a voluntary response.
      ?

      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.