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
    Some fitting attitude theories aspire only to capture cer... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Aesthetics
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→A fitting attitude theory need not accept normative reduction as a general thesis

    Some fitting attitude theories aspire only to capture certain values rather than all values

    AestheticsTruth & Knowledge
    ?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

    AestheticsTruth & Knowledge

    Related

    A fitting attitude theory need not accept normative reduction as a general thesi...Such theories may accept normative reduction only for those specific values, not...

    Similar

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Aesthetics
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    It is plausible to hold a fitting attitude theory for response-depende...85%Emotions cannot be identified without invoking the very evaluative con...84%A fitting attitude theory need not accept normative reduction as a gen...83%The revival of interest in fitting attitude (FA) theory is largely due...83%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: fitting-attitude-theories
    View source passageHide passage
    In order to differentiate buck passing from fitting attitude theory, we need to discriminate between the aspect of Scanlon's view that is part of an FA theory, the aspect amenable but not essential to FA theory, and the aspect that seems orthogonal to it. The analysis of value in terms of reasons, which we've called normative reduction, is one of the two constitutive claims of FA theory. (Even here a caveat is needed, however, since those FA theories that aspire merely to capture some values may

    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