Make a justified conclusion about whether

how to write a conclusion example

Cleeremans, and P. Others have argued that it is, however, possible to accept that there is this distinctive, central notion of acting for a reason but still deny that an agent needs to know a fact in order to act guided by it.

What we would like to have is a theory that can do the following: The theory would take as input i a set of hypotheses and ii all the evidence known concerning those hypotheses.

justify opinions and conclusions with evidence

When rats or pigeons learn, they are acting inductively. Among those who hold that normative reasons are facts, some hold that facts are true propositions and hence that reasons are also true propositions Darwall ; Smith ; Scanlon However we explain their normativity, normative reasons should be capable of motivating agents to act—though of course they may often fail to do so.

In short, as perspectivism says, the normative reasons an agent has depend in an important sense on his epistemic perspective, and so an agent can have a normative reason that is a false belief.

how to write a conclusion

This is an explanatory reason. Perspectivists tend to defend their position by reference to considerations of rationality.

Conclusion justified in research

This argument about motivating reasons is not, therefore, decisive for psychologism. Along with other arguments, they have led many philosophers see Alvarez , b, ; Bittner ; Dancy , ; Hornsby , Hyman , ; McDowell ; Raz ; Schueler ; Stout ; Stoutland ; Williamson , among others to reject psychologism. Cuneo, T. And non-psychologism does not seem to have a ready answer to what the motivating reason is in these cases. One proposal is to say that in error cases agents act for a reason that is a falsehood that the agent believes. In such a case, what the agent would give as his reason—say, that Desdemona has been unfaithful—is false. For a detailed discussion of these issues, see the entry on reasons for action: internal vs. These decisions are guided by the questions being asked, the types of data available and by input from stakeholders and other users of the data. This view is associated with Aristotle who, in the Nicomachean Ethics, links what is right to do what one has reason to do with what is conducive to the good whether intrinsically or instrumentally. Desire-based accounts of reasons might seem to have the edge here. Therefore, any account of normative reasons must offer a plausible explanation of the relationship between the normativity of reasons and the capacity that reasons have to motivate agents to act. Philosophers disagree about how to reconcile these competing claims.

On the other hand, it might seem that Othello does have a reason, for he believes that Desdemona is unfaithful and believes, moreover, that his reputation has been damaged and needs to be restored with her death.

Rated 8/10 based on 28 review
Download
Reasons for Action: Justification, Motivation, Explanation (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)