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 If the concept of practical reasons is the concept of an explanation of why doing A is good, then a different argument is needed to rule out external reasons

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Williams' current argument depends on analyzing practical reasons as explanations of action
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The rival analysis does not analyze practical reasons as explanations of action
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The rival analysis is compatible with the existence of external reasons
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Aristotle's practical syllogism grounds reasons in the good, not in motivational states, making goodness explanatorily prior to action.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If goodness explains why an action is rationally required, reasons claims track evaluative facts independent of any agent's subjective motivational set.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Williams' internalism collapses the distinction between what motivates and what justifies, which the rival analysis preserves by treating 'good' as action-guiding without being desire-relative.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Parfit's argument in 'On What Matters' shows that objective list theories of the good generate agent-independent reasons without any reference to subjective motivational sets.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If practical reasons are explanations of why doing A is good rather than explanations of actual motivation, then the burden shifts to Williams to show goodness itself is always relativized to a subjective motivational set.
      ?

      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.