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
    Dispositions are sufficient to explain why an agent would... — Carmelics
    Home/Moral Responsibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Williams' argument for internalism about reasons is stronger than the Classical Argument for internalism

    Dispositions are sufficient to explain why an agent would be motivated under counterfactual conditions

    Modality & PossibilityMoral Responsibility
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

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

    Topics

    Moral ResponsibilityModality & Possibility

    Connections

    4 topics

    Free Will & Foreknowledge2 linked

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Moral Responsibility
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    No other argument is better
    1 linked
    Truth & Knowledge1 linked
    Consciousness & Mind1 linked

    Related

    Actual desires are not necessary for such counterfactual motivation explanationsThe Classical Argument depends on the Humean Theory of Motivation (HTM), which c...Williams' argument for internalism about reasons is stronger than the Classical ...Williams' argument grounds reasons in dispositions to be motivated, not actual d...
    +1 moreShow less
    Williams' argument is independent of HTM

    Similar

    While an agent must know or believe the thing that constitutes a reaso...82%Belief-desire explanations support relevant counterfactuals about the ...81%The first premise connects the existence of reasons with the possibili...80%A disposition to be motivated by beliefs about reasons can explain why...80%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: reasons-internal-external
    View source passageHide passage
    Although Williams’ article is commonly seen as the classic defense of HTR, on this reading it only restricts agents’ reasons to their dispositions to be motivated, and not more narrowly to their actual desires. This is because dispositions are sufficient, and actual desires not necessary, in order to explain why somebody would be motivated under counterfactual conditions. This argument is therefore stronger than the Classical Argument because of its independence from HTM, which controversially c

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective