Volume 1, Number 1
April 2005
SYMPOSIUM

Instrumental Mythology

Volume 1, Number 1, April 2005, Pages 1–13
https://doi.org/10.26556/jesp.v1i1.10
PDFPDF

Abstract

In this response to Joseph Raz’s important and provocative article, “The Myth of Instrumental Reason,” it is argued that Raz is unsuccessful in his own terms at avoiding the unintuitive commitments that he argues plague other accounts of relationship between ends and reasons. Fortunately, it is argued, these unintuitive commitments are not truly so bad.
Copyright © 2005 Mark Schroeder
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International license.
|

Instrumental Rationality: A Reprise

Joseph Raz

Instrumental Rationality: Not Dead Yet

David Sobel

The Myth of Instrumental Rationality

Joseph Raz

Comment on Raz

R. Jay Wallace

Two Approaches to Instrumental Rationality and Belief Consistency

John Brunero

Have We Reason to Do as Rationality Requires? A Comment on Raz

John Broome

The Goal Problem in the “Now What” Problem

Xinkan Zhao

A New Theory of Humean Reasons? A Critical Note on Schroeder’s Hypotheticalism

Matthew Bedke

Hume’s Internalism Reconsidered

Dale Dorsey

In Defense of the Wide-Scope Instrumental Principle

Simon Rippon

Rationality and Responding to Normative Reasons

Mohamad Hadi Safaei

Rationality, Shmationality: Even Newer Shmagency Worries

Olof Leffler

Portico