Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that An option can be self-ratifying even when chosen for the wrong reasons, making ratification extensionally adequate but normatively vacuous.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Ratification of a choice made for wrong reasons merely masks irrationality rather than legitimizing it—the defect persists in epistemic quality.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Normative adequacy cannot be truly separated from extensional success; endorsing a badly-reasoned choice corrupts the normative status of both.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
If we accept vacuous self-ratification as legitimate, we abandon the distinction between rational and merely stable preferences.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Self-ratification requires only coherence between choice and reflective endorsement, independent of what motivated the initial selection.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
A choice can satisfy practical rationality standards while originating from epistemic vice, making normative evaluation separate from functional adequacy.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
If ratification tracks only whether you'd choose again, not why you chose, then reasons are causally irrelevant to its extensional success.
?
How convincing is this?
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.