Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that The analyticity claim conflates the normativity of practical reason with a merely descriptive psychological connection between volition and action.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
The distinction between descriptive and normative may collapse for rational agents: rationality itself constitutes a normative standard.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Practical reason's normativity emerges from the internal logic of goal-directed agency, not from external moral facts—making analyticity coherent.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Akrasia involves contradictory judgments about action, not refutation of volition-action analytics; it reflects weakness of will, not conceptual error.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Normativity requires 'oughtness'—a prescriptive force that mere psychological facts about how minds work cannot provide.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
That an agent desires X and believes X promotes their goal doesn't logically entail they ought to pursue X without additional normative premises.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
If analyticity held, akratic action (wanting A while judging B better) would be conceptually impossible, yet it plainly occurs.
?
How convincing is this?
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.