Autores
Resumo
In this paper, I shall attempt a characterization of Smith’s concept of ‘rationality’ in the practical sphere. My goal is to show that Smith’s requirements of rationality (as inspired by Williams) cannot provide a good and workable account of what it means to be a fully rational agent. To this end, I shall examine Williams’ internalist requirement on reason and discuss the main shortcomings of such account of rationality. I shall try to show, also, that Smith’s and Williams’ views on rationality are too restrictive and thus cannot be applied to ordinary agents who deliberate in real life.
Referências
Audi, Robert. The Practical Authority of Normative Beliefs: Toward an Integrated Theory of Practical Rationality. Organon, 2013: F 20 (4), pp. 527-545
Audi, Robert. Reasons, Practical Reason, and Practical Reasoning. Ratio (new series) 2004: XVII, 2, pp. 119-149
Garcia, C. E. Popper. El conocimiento objetivo y el mundo tres. Manizales: Universidad de Caldas, 2019.
Garcia, C. E. Popper’s theory of science. An apologia. London: Continuum, 2006.
Gao, Jie. Rational action without knowledge (and vice versa). Synthese, 2017: 194:1901–1917
Logins, Arturs. The problem of massive deception for justification norms of action. Acta Analytica, 2014: 220, 1, pp. 1-20
Schroeder, Timothy. Practical rationality is a problem in the philosophy of mind. Philosophical Issues, 20, Philosophy of Mind, 2010: pp. 394-409
Sinhababu, Neil. The Humean Theory of Practical Irrationality. Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy. 2011: 6,1, pp. 1-13
Smith, Michael. Internal Reasons. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research. 1995: LV, No. 1.
Velleman, J. David. The possibility of Practical Reason. Ethics, 1996: 106, No. 4, pp. 694-726.
Watson, Gary. “Free Agency”. (1975) Reprinted in Gary Watson, ed., Free Will. Oxford University Press. 1982
Williams, Bernard. “Internal and external reasons.” In: Moral Luck, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981. p. 101-113 10