Journal of Economic Methodology 13 (3):349-369 (2006)
|Abstract||In his critique of a self?interest understanding of rationality Amartya Sen appeals to notions like commitment and identity. Sen uses ?identity? in an abstract sense: it refers to the conditions of rational agency. Sen's emphasis on the notion of identity finds a parallel in recent Kantian accounts, e.g. the work of Christine M. Korsgaard and Elizabeth S. Anderson. In my paper I compare Sen's account of practical rationality and identity with the Kantian accounts of practical rationality which consider the concept of practical identity as crucial for understanding the connection between rationality and morality. Sen's account, as I will show, does not follow the Kantian line altogether since Sen, unlike the Kantian accounts, does not identify the rules of rationality with the rules of morality. Sen's position, as I argue, can be read as a middle position between Humeanism on the one hand and a Kantian position on the other, and I defend such a middle position.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Mozaffar Qizilbash (2009). Identity, Community, and Justice: Locating Amartya Sen's Work on Identity. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 8 (3):251-266.
Hugh J. McCann (1990). Practical Rationality. Journal of Philosophical Research 15:57-77.
Fabienne Peter & Hans Bernhard Schmid (2005). Symposium on Rationality and Commitment: Introduction. Economics and Philosophy 21 (1):1-3.
Philip Pettit (2005). Construing Sen on Commitment. Economics and Philosophy 21 (1):15-32.
Shatakshee Dhongde & Prasanta K. Pattanaik (2009). Preference, Choice, and Rationality : Amartya Sen's Critique of the Theory of Rational Choice in Economics. In Christopher W. Morris (ed.), Amartya Sen. Cambridge University Press.
Carlo Argenton & Enzo Rossi (forthcoming). Pluralism, Preferences and Deliberation: A Critique of Sen's Constructive Argument for Democracy. Journal of Social Philosophy.
Amartya K. Sen (1977). Rationality and Morality: A Reply. Erkenntnis 11 (1):225 - 232.
Amartya Sen (2005). Why Exactly is Commitment Important for Rationality? Economics and Philosophy 21 (1):5-14.
Evan Riley (2011). Against Sen Against Rawls On Justice. Indian Journal of Human Development 5 (1):211-221.
Lydia Moland (2011). Agency and Practical Identity: A Hegelian Response to Korsgaard. Metaphilosophy 42 (4):368-375.
David Cummiskey (2011). Korsgaard's Rejection of Consequentialism. Metaphilosophy 42 (4):360-367.
Christian Elsholtz & Christian List, A Simple Proof of Sen's Possibility Theorem on Majority Decisions.
John B. Davis (2006). Social Identity Strategies in Recent Economics. Journal of Economic Methodology 13 (3):371-390.
Amartya Sen (2009). The Fog of Identity. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 8 (3):285-288.
T. M. Scanlon (2001). Symposium on Amartya Sen's Philosophy: 3 Sen and Consequentialism. Economics and Philosophy 17 (1):39-50.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2012-02-20
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?