Abstract
Weak particularism about reasons is the view that the normative valency of some descriptive considerations varies, while others have an invariant normative valency. A defence of this view needs to respond to arguments that a consideration cannot count in favour of any action unless it counts in favour of every action. But it cannot resort to a global holism about reasons, if it claims that there are some examples of invariant valency. This paper argues for weak particularism, and presents a framework for understanding the relationships between practical reasons. A central part of this framework is the idea that there is an important kind of reason - a 'presumptive reason' - which need not be conclusive, but which is neither pro tanto nor prima facie.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 169-190 |
Number of pages | 22 |
Journal | Proceedings of the Aristotelean Society |
Volume | 76 |
Issue number | 1 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - Jul 2002 |
Externally published | Yes |