David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Synthese 99 (2):137-72 (1994)
Cohen (1981) and others have made an interesting argument for the thesis that humans are rational: normative principles of reasoning and actual human reasoning ability cannot diverge because both are determined by the same process involving our intuitions about what constitutes good reasoning as a starting point. Perhaps the most sophisticated version of this argument sees reflective equilibrium as the process that determines both what the norms of reasoning are and what actual cognitive competence is. In this essay, I will evaluate both the general argument that humans are rational and the reflective equilibrium argument for the same thesis. While I find both accounts initially appealing, I will argue that neither successfully establishes that humans are rational
|Keywords||Epistemology Equilibrium Knowledge Linguistics Rationality|
|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
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Nenad Miščević (1996). Should Reason Be Fragmented? International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 10 (1):23-36.
L. Jonathan Cohen (1994). A Reply to Stein. Synthese 99 (2):173 - 176.
Similar books and articles
Matej Sušnik (2009). The Amoralist Objection and the Method of Moral Reasoning. Croatian Journal of Philosophy 9 (1):91-100.
Elias L. Khalil & Alain Marciano (2010). The Equivalence of Neo-Darwinism and Walrasian Equilibrium: In Defense of Organismus Economicus. Biology and Philosophy 25 (2):229-248.
Jared Bates (2005). The Old Problem of Induction and the New Reflective Equilibrium. Dialectica 59 (3):347–356.
Edward Stein (1996). Without Good Reason: The Rationality Debate in Philosophy and Cognitive Science. Oxford University Press.
Edward Stein (2005). Wide Reflective Equilibrium as an Answer to an Objection to Moral Heuristics. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (4):561-562.
Carson Strong (2010). Theoretical and Practical Problems with Wide Reflective Equilibrium in Bioethics. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 31 (2):123-140.
Kai Nielsen (1982). Grounding Rights and a Method of Reflective Equilibrium. Inquiry 25 (3):277 – 306.
Ben Eggleston (2010). Practical Equilibrium: A Way of Deciding What to Think About Morality. Mind 119 (475):549 - 584.
Simon John Duffy (2001). An Intuitionist Response to Moral Scepticism: A Critique of Mackie's Scepticism, and an Alternative Proposal Combining Ross's Intuitionism with a Kantian Epistemology. Dissertation, University of Edinburgh
Joakim Sandberg & Niklas Juth (2011). Ethics and Intuitions: A Reply to Singer. [REVIEW] Journal of Ethics 15 (3):209-226.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads71 ( #64,550 of 1,937,449 )
Recent downloads (6 months)10 ( #55,098 of 1,937,449 )
How can I increase my downloads?