Sean McKeever
Davidson College
Michael Ridge
University of Edinburgh
The present chapter attempts to resolve a puzzle about normative testimony. On the one hand, agents act on the advice of others, advice which purports to tell them what they have reason to do. When they do so, they can act for good reason. This thought, though, sits uneasily with another: that the mere fact that someone has advised a course of action is not itself a reason. An interesting view of reasons recently defended by Stephen Kearns and Daniel Star offers a resolution to the puzzle. On this view, reasons are evidence, specifically evidence concerning what one ought to do. If they are correct, then sufficiently good advice is, it turns out, itself a reason, and it is then no puzzle that an agent who acts on such advice is acting for a good reason. The chapter argues that this account of reasons is subject to counterexamples. There are reasons which are not evidence and evidence which is not a reason. This view of reasons cannot therefore hold the key to solving the puzzle of normative testimony. The solution to the puzzle of normative testimony lies instead in a more careful account of what it is to act for a reason. Such an account can preserve both the intuition that advice is not an independent reason and the thought that agents who act on sound advice act for good reason. The account also explains how agents can act for “elusive reasons.” These are facts which are reasons but which would not be if the agent became sufficiently aware of them.
Keywords reasons, evidence, acting for a reason, testimony, advice, advisor, normative, normativity, practical reason, rationality, ought, virtue
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199653492.003.0004
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 71,290
External links

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.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Reasons and Guidance.Jonathan Way & Daniel Whiting - 2016 - Analytic Philosophy 57 (3):214-235.
Right in Some Respects: Reasons as Evidence.Daniel Whiting - 2018 - Philosophical Studies 175 (9):2191-2208.
Redundant Reasons.Daniel Wodak - 2020 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 98 (2):266-278.
E Xpressivism and E Pistemology: E Pistemology for E Cumenical E Xpressivists.Michael Ridge - 2007 - Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 81 (1):83-108.

View all 10 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Reasons with Rationalism After All.Michael Smith - 2009 - Analysis 69 (3):521-530.
The Voices of Reason.Chrisoula Andreou - 2005 - American Philosophical Quarterly 42 (1):33 - 45.
Acting and Believing Under the Guise of Normative Reasons.Keshav Singh - 2019 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 99 (2):409-430.
Reasons as Evidence.Stephen Kearns & Daniel Star - 2009 - Oxford Studies in Metaethics 4:215-42.
Normative Reasons as Good Bases.Alex Gregory - 2016 - Philosophical Studies 173 (9):2291-2310.
Trust and Reason.Edward Hinchman - 2000 - Dissertation, University of Michigan
Explaining Reasons.Stephen Finlay - 2012 - Deutsches Jahrbuch Fuer Philosophie 4:112-126.
Normative Reasons and the Possibility of Motivation.Andrés Carlos Luco - 2014 - South African Journal of Philosophy 33 (1):47-63.


Added to PP index

Total views
13 ( #772,437 of 2,519,275 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #271,748 of 2,519,275 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes