Humeanism, psychologism, and the normative story [Book Review]
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 67 (2):460–467 (2003)
Jonathan Dancy’s Practical Reality is, I think, best understood as an attempt to undermine our allegiance to these two purported constitutive claims about action. If we must think that psychological states figure in the explanation of action then, according to Dancy, we should suppose that those psychological states are beliefs rather than desire-belief pairs. Dancy thus prefers pure cognitivism to Humeanism. But in fact he thinks that we have no business accepting any form of psychologism in the first place; no business accepting a theory that explains an agent’s actions by reference to that agent’s psychological states. For though it is indeed a truism that actions are explained by reasons, Dancy argues that psychological states are only rarely, if ever, reasons. He thus prefers the unadorned normative story, a story which contents itself with explaining actions by laying out the considerations in the light of which the agent acted as he did, to any form of psychologism. I will consider Dancy’s arguments for these claims in turn.
|Keywords||Dancy Humeanism psychologism|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Michael Smith (1994). The Moral Problem. Blackwell.
Jonathan Dancy (2000). Practical Reality. Oxford University Press.
Michael Stocker (1979). Desiring the Bad: An Essay in Moral Psychology. Journal of Philosophy 76 (12):738-753.
John McDowell (1978). Are Moral Requirements Hypothetical Imperatives? Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 52:13-29+31-42.
Michael Smith (2001). The Incoherence Argument: Reply to Schafer-Landau. Analysis 61 (3):254–266.
Citations of this work BETA
Susanne Mantel (2014). No Reason for Identity: On the Relation Between Motivating and Normative Reasons. Philosophical Explorations 17 (1):49-62.
Christian Miller (2008). Motivation in Agents. Noûs 42 (2):222–266.
Constantine Sandis (2012). The Objects of Action Explanation. Ratio 25 (3):326-344.
Attila Tanyi (2014). Pure Cognitivism and Beyond. Acta Analytica 29 (3):331-348.
Giles Pearson (2015). XIV—What Are Sources of Motivation? Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 115 (3 pt 3):255-276.
Similar books and articles
Bart Streumer (2013). Why There Really Are No Irreducibly Normative Properties. In David Bakhurst, Brad Hooker & Margaret Olivia Little (eds.), Thinking about Reasons: Themes from the Philosophy of Jonathan Dancy. OUP 310-336.
Alfred Mele (2007). Reasonology and False Beliefs. Philosophical Papers 36 (1):91-118.
Wayne A. Davis (2005). Reasons and Psychological Causes. Philosophical Studies 122 (1):51 - 101.
Pascal Engel (2005). Logical Reasons. Philosophical Explorations 8 (1):21 – 38.
Stephen Darwall (2003). Desires, Reasons, and Causes. [REVIEW] Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 67 (2):436–443.
Eric Wiland (2003). Psychologism, Practical Reason and the Possibility of Error. Philosophical Quarterly 53 (210):68–78.
R. Jay Wallace (2003). Explanation, Deliberation, and Reasons. [REVIEW] Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 67 (2):429–435.
Jonathan Dancy (1995). Why There Is Really No Such Thing as the Theory of Motivation. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 95:1-18.
Achim Lohmar (2008). The Failure of Pure Cognitivism. Grazer Philosophische Studien 76 (1):149-166.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads53 ( #80,525 of 1,907,353 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #275,486 of 1,907,353 )
How can I increase my downloads?