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
    Counterfactual Motivation versions of internalism commit ... — Carmelics
    Home/Moral Responsibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Counterfactual Motivation versions of internalism commit the conditional fallacy.

    Moral Responsibility
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    2 reasons for
    1 reason against

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Williams's full rationality condition transforms an agent's actual motivational set into a hypothetical set that may lack the original set's constitutive features.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A counterfactual specifying idealized deliberation self-undermines when the idealization removes the very psychological states grounding the agent's practical identity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Korsgaard's constitutivism confirms that reasons tied to non-rational commitments dissolve under conditions that eliminate those commitments, exposing the fallacy structurally.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Johnston's conditional fallacy criterion requires that the test conditions be compatible with the existence of the very phenomenon being tested.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Full rationality counterfactuals are incompatible with reasons grounded in akrasia, addiction, or weakness of will, which are paradigmatic cases internalists must accommodate.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Because the counterfactual condition is not co-satisfiable with the reason's existence condition, the internalist schema is formally defective, not merely contingently incomplete.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The conditional fallacy occurs when a theory claims an agent has a reason to do A only if the agent would be motivated under certain conditions, yet those very conditions eliminate the reason.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Some internalist theses appeal to counterfactuals involving full rationality.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Some reasons exist precisely because an agent is not fully rational.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Topics

    Moral ResponsibilityTruth & Knowledge

    Connections

    1 topic

    Philosophy of Language4 linked

    Related

    A counterfactual specifying idealized deliberation self-undermines when the idea...Because the counterfactual condition is not co-satisfiable with the reason's exi...Full rationality counterfactuals are incompatible with reasons grounded in akras...If the conditions specified by the internalist thesis obtain (e.g., full rationa...
    +6 moreShow less
    Johnston's conditional fallacy criterion requires that the test conditions be co...Korsgaard's constitutivism confirms that reasons tied to non-rational commitment...Some internalist theses appeal to counterfactuals involving full rationality.Some reasons exist precisely because an agent is not fully rational.The conditional fallacy occurs when a theory claims an agent has a reason to do ...Williams's full rationality condition transforms an agent's actual motivational ...

    Similar

    This claim is equivalent to a statement of the Actual State version of...82%Reasons internalism states only a necessary condition on reasons, not ...78%Williams' argument for internalism about reasons is stronger than the ...77%Williams' view is an Actual State internalism, not a Counterfactual Mo...77%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: reasons-internal-external
    View source passageHide passage
    (Nontrivial) Counterfactual Motivation versions of internalism are sometimes accused of committing a ‘conditional fallacy’ (named by Shope (1978)). To commit this ‘fallacy’ is to claim that it is necessary for an agent’s having a reason to do A that he would be motivated under certain conditions to do A, when there are some reasons that the agent can have only if precisely those conditions do not obtain. For example, some versions of internalism appeal to counterfactuals involving full rationali
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (2 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit