Creating the Kingdom of Ends – by Christine M. Korsgaard July Two kinds of skepticism about practical reason: Content skepticism: Korsgaard’s first claim: Motivation skepticism depends on content skepticism. Illustration. argue that practical reason is incapable of generating motivation on its own.! Christine Korsgaard calls this view. ‘motivational skepticism’, and in “Skepticism.
|Published (Last):||22 August 2009|
|PDF File Size:||2.22 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||16.74 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
The favored creature is portrayed as able to see that his actions are rational in the sense that they promote the means to his end of happiness; but he is not motivated by their reasonableness; he skrpticism from his inctinct. Skepticism, Self-Knowledge and Responsibility.
Practical Reason and Motivational Skepticism
In this article, Korsgaard mentions many philosophers such as Hume, Kant, Pracical and Williams as the ones whose ideas are related to practical reason that are close to her topic; however, Hume and Kant are the two traditional philosophers who get more of her attention than others. Williams seems to think that this is a reason for doubting whether reaeon practical reasons exist: It is important; however, that although in the Critique of Practical Reason, Kant does not try to argue that pure reason can be motivated, he has detailed things to say about how it can be motive — about how it function as an incentive in combating other incentives.
Don’t have an account?
Nor can one assume that the subjective motivational set consists only of individual elements; for that is to close off without argument the possibility that reason could yield conclusions that every rational being must acknowledge and be capable of being motivated by. The conclusion is that, if we are rational, we will act as the categorical imperative directs, but we are not necessarily rational. By the end of the Second Section of the Groundwork, Kant has done what he set out to do: Kant maintained that, if we thought about it, we would see that we are not immune to the laws of pure practical reason: Some doubt or argument has made her consider eliminating the principle from her subjective motivational set.
Since Kant takes the classified characteristic of autonomy and the imperative to be necessarily connected, Korsgaard also wants to take his view into consideration for her arguments.
However, she also realizes that the idea that an acknowledged reason can never fail to motivate is a strange idea and that it is based on some sort of misunderstanding, but she has also suggested that a misunderstanding of the internalism requirement is a possible account. She may find that she thinks that people should have and act on such a principle that is in some rough way a good idea, and so she may retain it and even proceed to educate those under her influence to adopt it.
Kant und die Alternativen. Skepticism About Practical Reason: In the Critique of Practical Reason, Kant turns his strategy around. Rather, their necessity may lie in the fact that, when they do move us, they move us with the force of necessity.
But it will not be the case that they necessarily move us.
In summary, I think although Korsgaard acknowledges that Kant’s view about practical reasons as universal laws of reason can provide additional features that Hume’s views do not have, Korsgaards still thinks that Kant hasn’t shown that his categorical imperative really exists, and the most important point of all is that Kant didn’t try to argue that pure reason could motivate people and that all he tried korsggaard prove was teason how it functioned as an incentive in combating with other incentives.
However, Krsgaard says that there is something else one might mean in the second case which is that knowing the truth about the relevant causal relations, we might choose insufficient means to our end and fail to choose sufficient and available means to the end, and she calls that a true irrationality.
Five Locusts: Korsgaard’s Skepticism about Practical Reason
History of Western Philosophy. Cambridge University Press, Kant und die Alternativen. Many things can interfere with the functioning of the rational operations in a human body; thus there is no reason to deny that human beings might be practically irrational in the sense that Hume considers might be practically irrational: But the internalism requirement does not imply that nothing can interfere with this motivational transmission.
Conflicting Views on Practical Reason.
Seeing What to Do: Thus, the internalism requirement for theoretical reasons is that they be capable of convincing us insofar as we are rational. First of all, Korsgaard says that skepticism about practical reason involves Hume’s ideas about the relationship between reason and desires and that Hume uses desire as means to get reason obey it without telling whether a desire is rational or irrational.
Transcendental Arguments and Their Limits. Reason must be able to produce an entirely new motive, the thing that Hume said could not be done. As Nagel points out, this approach also characterizes the moral philosophy of Kant.
Sign in to use this feature. Paul Russell – – In Heiner F. Any assumption of this kind simply begs the question against the motivational skeptic. Now what will she think?
Many things might cause us to fail to be convinced by a good argument. Classical, Early, and Medieval Plays and Playwrights: Practical Reason and Motivational Scepticism. What Hume means is the possible content of principles of reason that carry out action and the scope of its motivational force, and the answers for these matters are what Korsgaard wants to provide.
From considerations concerning the necessity that reasons be internal and capable of motivating us which are almost identical to Williams’, Nagel argues that investigations into practical reason will yield discoveries about our motivational capacities.