Projects per year
Abstract
Abstract in Undetermined
Classical fitting-attitude analyses understand value in terms of it being fitting, or more generally, there being a reason to favour the bearer of value. However, recently such analyses have been interpreted as referring to two reason notions rather than only one. The general idea is that the properties of the object provide reason not only for a certain kind of favouring(s) vis- à-vis the object, but the very same properties should also figure in the intentional content of the favouring; the agent should favour the object on account of those properties that provide reason for favouring the object in the first place—where “favouring on account of” refers to the agent’s so-called motivating reason. This paper discusses this novel approach to fitting-attitude (and buck-passing) analysis: should those considerations (facts or features) that constitute the reason for favouring also be included in the intentional content of the favouring. In other words, should fitting-attitude analysts require a reference to the agent’s motivating reason in the analysis? While this enlargement of the original proposal might seem intuitive given that favourings are discerning attitudes, it is nonetheless argued that proponents of the fitting-attitude analysis are in fact not served by such an expansion of the classical analysis
Classical fitting-attitude analyses understand value in terms of it being fitting, or more generally, there being a reason to favour the bearer of value. However, recently such analyses have been interpreted as referring to two reason notions rather than only one. The general idea is that the properties of the object provide reason not only for a certain kind of favouring(s) vis- à-vis the object, but the very same properties should also figure in the intentional content of the favouring; the agent should favour the object on account of those properties that provide reason for favouring the object in the first place—where “favouring on account of” refers to the agent’s so-called motivating reason. This paper discusses this novel approach to fitting-attitude (and buck-passing) analysis: should those considerations (facts or features) that constitute the reason for favouring also be included in the intentional content of the favouring. In other words, should fitting-attitude analysts require a reference to the agent’s motivating reason in the analysis? While this enlargement of the original proposal might seem intuitive given that favourings are discerning attitudes, it is nonetheless argued that proponents of the fitting-attitude analysis are in fact not served by such an expansion of the classical analysis
Original language | English |
---|---|
Publication status | Unpublished - 2012 |
Event | Mini-symposium ‘Ethical Theory and Practical Ethics’ - Amsterdam, VU University, Faculty of Philosophy, Section for Practical Philosophy Duration: 2012 Apr 27 → … |
Conference
Conference | Mini-symposium ‘Ethical Theory and Practical Ethics’ |
---|---|
Period | 2012/04/27 → … |
Subject classification (UKÄ)
- Philosophy
Free keywords
- value analysis
- fitting-attitude analysis
- motivating reasons
- normative reasons
- intentionality
- intentional content
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Dual-reason analyses revisited'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Projects
- 1 Finished