Ends

Social Theory and Practice 30 (4):507-533 (2004)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Rationalist opponents of Instrumentalism believe that reason can and should play some further role in determining our ends. Instrumentalists deny this: reason can generate only reasons for taking the necessary means to ends established antecedently by conative states. I argue that Instrumentalism cannot make adequate sense of the notion of ends. Instrumentalism requires a non-rational way of identifying ends and ascribing rational force to them, and there appears to be none consistent with Instrumentalism’s commitments. As an alternative I outline what I refer to as an Aristotelian conception of practical reason as a promising way of understanding practical rationality.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,219

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-02-21

Downloads
62 (#250,399)

6 months
7 (#350,235)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Mark LeBar
Florida State University

Citations of this work

Perfectionist Bads.Gwen Bradford - 2021 - Philosophical Quarterly 71 (3):586-604.
A Defence of a Rationalist Conception of Practical Reason.Gal Yehezkel - 2017 - European Journal of Analytic Philosophy 13 (1):39-57.
Can desires determine ends?Gal Yehezkel - 2017 - Philosophical Psychology 30 (8):1064-1077.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references