If normative reasons were true propositions, the 'wrong kind of reason' problem (Rabinowicz & Rønnow-Rasmussen) would be unresolvable, since propositions lack the evaluative directionality reasons require.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

1 reason for

1 reason against

Reasons For

1 perspective

Reason for

1 perspective

Reason against

Based on where you are in your exploration

Rabinowicz & Rønnow-Rasmussen(in 21st-century analytic philosophy): Two contemporary philosophers who studied moral reasons and helped identify the 'wrong kind of reason' problem.
evaluative directionality(in ethics): The quality of pointing toward or guiding us toward what's valuable or good—reasons have a direction that aims at what matters morally.
normative reasons(Philosophy of action, reasons internalism debate): Reasons that bear on what an agent ought to do; on one view, understood in terms of explanatory/motivating reasons
true propositions(in metaphysics and logic): Statements that accurately describe reality, like 'water boils at 100 degrees Celsius' is a true proposition.
unresolvable(the dilemma in Kant's theory can't be resolved): Unable to be solved or fixed; the problem can't be overcome within the existing framework.
wrong kind of reason problem(Central challenge for all FA theories): The problem of identifying which considerations for or against evaluative attitudes are relevant to the value of their objects, as opposed to other kinds of reasons for holding those attitudes.

2 topics