Hard Truths, Soft Lies, Solitary Thoughts [Book Review]

Analysis 71 (2):333-341 (2011)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Hard Truths is an important book in its own right. It is also the latest contribution to a complex and impressive project that Elijah Milligram has been developing from his first book onwards. There he characterized practical induction as a type of reasoning that enables agents to learn from experiences of the new and the unfamiliar, agents whose inferences are from beliefs that they have formed either ‘in ways that have a suitable amount to do with [their] truth’, or, when ‘the appeal to truth is unhelpful’, in ways that underwrite such inferences as they are committed to drawing . In his introduction to his anthology on practical reasoning, Millgram catalogued the presently competing theories of practical reasoning, posing the question: what kind of reasoning should we employ in deciding between the claims of rival theories? The subtitle of his third book , ‘Practical Reasoning as a Foundation for Moral Theory’, already suggests its central thesis, that we should first survey the range of theories of practical reasoning , should then identify which moral theory it is with which each theory of practical reasoning is paired , should next decide which theory of practical reasoning is correct , and, finally, should adopt the moral theory paired with that theory of practical reasoning. There are at least three clusters of problems that badly need extended attention, if the claims of these three books are to be sustained: one concerning the account of truth presupposed by Millgram, a second to do with the inferences that we need to employ, and a third concerning the unity of reasoning agents. All three provide Hard Truths with subject-matter, but Millgram’s principal focus is ….

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,423

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

Why God's beliefs are not hard-type soft facts.David Widerker - 2002 - Religious Studies 38 (1):77-88.
God's Justified Knowledge and the Hard-Soft Fact Distinction.John R. Shook - 2006 - The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 8:69-73.
Soft facts and ontological dependence.Patrick Todd - 2013 - Philosophical Studies 164 (3):829-844.
Soft libertarianism and hard compatibilism.Gary Watson - 1999 - The Journal of Ethics 3 (4):351-365.
Hard and soft accidental uniformities.Eduardo H. Flichman - 1995 - Philosophy of Science 62 (1):31-43.
Hard, soft, or satisfying.Helen Longino - 1992 - Social Epistemology 6 (3):281 – 287.
Hard and soft deontologism.Sandra Anderson Schuh - 1992 - Journal of Value Inquiry 26 (2):281-285.
The Soft-Line Solution to Pereboom's Four-Case Argument.Kristin Mickelson - 2010 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 88 (4):595-617.

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-04-01

Downloads
102 (#167,667)

6 months
3 (#1,002,413)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Alasdair MacIntyre
University of Notre Dame

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The logic of natural language.Fred Sommers - 1982 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Practical induction.Elijah Millgram - 1997 - Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Hard Truths.Elijah Millgram (ed.) - 2009 - Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.

View all 7 references / Add more references