The Wrong Kind of Reason

Journal of Philosophy 102 (9):437 - 457 (2005)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

A good number of people currently thinking and writing about reasons identify a reason as a consideration that counts in favor of an action or attitude.1 I will argue that using this as our fundamental account of what a reason is generates a fairly deep and recalcitrant ambiguity; this account fails to distinguish between two quite different sets of considerations that count in favor of certain attitudes, only one of which are the “proper” or “appropriate” kind of reason for them. This ambiguity has been the topic of recent discussion, under the head “the wrong kind of reasons problem.”2 I will suggest that confusion about “the wrong kind of reason” will be dispelled by changing our account of what a reason is. While I agree both that reasons are considerations and that certain..

Other Versions

reprint Hieronymi, Pamela (2018) "The Wrong Kind of Reason". In Fantl, Jeremy, McGrath, Matthew, Sosa, Ernest, Contemporary epistemology: an anthology, pp. : Wiley (2018)

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
3,227 (#3,108)

6 months
416 (#4,288)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Pamela Hieronymi
University of California, Los Angeles

Citations of this work

Responsibility for believing.Pamela Hieronymi - 2008 - Synthese 161 (3):357-373.
Fittingness First.Conor McHugh & Jonathan Way - 2016 - Ethics 126 (3):575-606.
Equal treatment for belief.Susanna Rinard - 2019 - Philosophical Studies 176 (7):1923-1950.

View all 262 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Actions, Reasons, and Causes.Donald Davidson - 1963 - Journal of Philosophy 60 (23):685.
Buck-passing and the wrong kind of reasons.Jonas Olson - 2004 - Philosophical Quarterly 54 (215):295–300.

Add more references