A counterfactual account of diachronic structural rationality

被引:0
作者
Altner, Franz [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Vienna, Dept Philosophy, Vienna, Austria
来源
INQUIRY-AN INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY | 2024年 / 67卷 / 01期
基金
欧洲研究理事会;
关键词
Intentions; diachronic rationality; diachronic deliberation; rational requirements; transformative choices; SELF;
D O I
10.1080/0020174X.2021.1934533
中图分类号
B82 [伦理学(道德学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Philosophers who take rationality to consist in the satisfaction of rational requirements typically favour rational requirements that govern mental attitudes at a time rather than across times. One such account has been developed by Broome in Rationality through reasoning. He claims that diachronic functional properties of intentions such as settling on courses of actions and resolving conflicts are emergent properties that can be explained with reference to synchronic rational pressures. This is why he defends only a minimal diachronic requirement which characterises forgetting as irrational. In this paper, I show that Broome's diachronically minimalist account lacks the resources to explain how a rational agent may resolve incommensurable choices by an act of will. I argue that one can solve this problem by either specifying a mode of diachronic deliberation or by introducing a genuinely diachronic requirement that governs the rational stability of an intention via a diachronic counterfactual condition concerning rational reconsideration. My proposal is similar in spirit to Gauthier's account in his seminal paper 'Assure and threaten'. It improves on his work by being both more general and explanatorily richer in its application with regard to diachronic phenomena such as transformative choices and acts of will.
引用
收藏
页码:560 / 589
页数:30
相关论文
共 30 条
  • [1] Bratman M, 1987, Intention, Plans and Practical Reasoning
  • [2] Bratman M. E., 1988, Computational Intelligence, V4, P349, DOI 10.1111/j.1467-8640.1988.tb00284.x
  • [3] Bratman Michael., 2018, PLANNING TIME SELF G, DOI DOI 10.1093/OSO/9780190867850.003.0005
  • [4] Bratman Michael., 1999, FACES INTENTION SELE
  • [5] TIME, RATIONALITY, AND SELF-GOVERNANCE
    Bratman, Michael E.
    [J]. PHILOSOPHICAL ISSUES, 2012, 22 (01) : 73 - 88
  • [6] Broome John., 2001, PRACTICAL RATIONALIT, P98, DOI [10.1017/CBO9780511570803.006, DOI 10.1017/CBO9780511570803.006, 10.1017/CBO9780511570803.006-120, DOI 10.1017/CBO9780511570803.006-120]
  • [7] The possibility of parity
    Chang, R
    [J]. ETHICS, 2002, 112 (04) : 659 - 688
  • [8] Chang R., 2013, RATIONALITY REASONIN, V8, P74, DOI DOI 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199678044.003.0004
  • [9] David Gauthier., 1998, MODELLING RATIONALIT, P41
  • [10] Diachronic Structural Rationality
    Ferrero, Luca
    [J]. INQUIRY-AN INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY, 2014, 57 (03): : 311 - 336