Checking the Neighborhood: A Reply to DiPaolo and and Behrends on Promotion

Nathaniel Sharadin

doi:https://doi.org/10.26556/jesp.v10i1.181

Volume 10, Number 1
April 2016

DISCUSSION

Checking the Neighborhood: A Reply to DiPaolo and and Behrends on Promotion

Volume 10, Number 1, April 2016, Pages 1–8

https://doi.org/10.26556/jesp.v10i1.181

PDF

Abstract

In previous work I argued that purely probabilistic accounts of what it takes to promote a desire are mistaken. This is because, I argued, there are desires that it is possible to promote but impossible to probabilistically promote. In a recent article critical of my account, Joshua DiPaolo and Jeffrey Behrends articulate a methodological principle—Check the Neighborhood—and claim that respecting this principle rescues pure probabilism from my argument. In this reply, I accept the methodological principle and show that, despite rendering the original argument invalid, there remains a neighboring argument against purely probabilistic accounts of promotion.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International license.

|

Finlay and Schroeder on Promoting a Desire

Jeff Behrends and Joshua DiPaolo

Reason to Promotion Inferences

Joshua DiPaolo and Jeff Behrends

Rationality and Responding to Normative Reasons

Mohamad Hadi Safaei

Attraction, Aversion, and Meaning in Life

Alisabeth Ayars

How Temptation Works

John Schwenkler

Resolution and Resolve: Rationally Resisting Temptation

Abigail Bruxvoort

Naturalizing Moral Naturalism

Jessica Isserow

On an Analytic Definition of Love

Tyler J. VanderWeele

The Case for Stance-Dependent Reasons

David Sobel

Rationality, Appearances, and Apparent Facts

Javier González de Prado Salas

Can There Be Government House Reasons for Action?

Hille Paakkunainen

Are All Normative Judgments Desire-Like?

Alex Gregory