References

Artūrs Logins

doi:10.1017/9781009076012.009

References

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 21 July 2022

Artūrs Logins

Show author details

Artūrs Logins: Affiliation:
Universität Zürich

Book contents

Summary

A summary is not available for this content. As you have access to this content, full HTML content is provided on this page. A PDF of this content is also available in through the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Type: Chapter
Information: Normative Reasons
Between Reasoning and Explanation
, pp. 228 - 237

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009076012.009 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2022
Creative Commons: This content is Open Access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/cclicenses/

References

Alvarez, Maria. Kinds of Reasons: An Essay in the Philosophy of Action. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010.Google Scholar

Alvarez, Maria. Reasons for Action: Rationale, Motivation, Explanation. In Zalta, Edward N. (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2016 Edition), http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2016/entries/reasons-just-vs-expl/.Google Scholar

Anscombe, Elizabeth. Intention. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2000 [1957].Google Scholar

Arpaly, Nomy and Schroeder, Timothy. Deliberation and Acting for Reasons. Philosophical Review 121(2):209–239, 2012.Google Scholar

Asarnow, Samuel. Rational Internalism. Ethics 127(1):147–178, 2016.Google Scholar

Asarnow, Samuel. The Reasoning View and Defeasible Practical Reasoning. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 95(3):614–636, 2017.Google Scholar

Bader, Ralf. Conditions, Modifiers and Holism. In Lord, Errol and Maguire, Barry (eds.), Weighing Reasons. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 27–55, 2016.Google Scholar

Basu, Rima. Can Beliefs Wrong? Philosophical Topics 46(1):1–17, 2018.Google Scholar

Benmakhlouf, Ali. La force des raisons: Logique et médecine. Paris: Fayard, 2018.Google Scholar

Berker, Selim. A Combinatorial Argument against Practical Reasons for Belief. Analytic Philosophy 59(4):427–470, 2018.Google Scholar

Boghossian, Paul A. The Normativity of Content. Philosophical Issues 13(1):31–45, 2003.Google Scholar

Broome, John. Reasons. In Jay Wallace, R., Smith, Michael, Scheffler, Samuel, and Pettit, Philip (eds.), Reason and Value: Themes from the Moral Philosophy of Joseph Raz. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 28–55, 2004.Google Scholar

Broome, John. Reply to Southwood, Kearns and Star, and Cullity. Ethics 119(1):96–108, 2008.Google Scholar

Broome, John. Rationality through Reasoning. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2013.Google Scholar

Broome, John. Reason versus Ought. Philosophical Issues 25(1):80–97, 2015.Google Scholar

Broome, John. Reason Fundamentalism and What Is Wrong with It. In Star, Daniel (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Reasons and Normativity. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 297–318, 2018.Google Scholar

Brown, Campbell. The Composition of Reasons. Synthese 191(5):779–800, 2014.Google Scholar

Brown, Jessica. Infallibilism, Evidence and Pragmatics. Analysis 73(4):626–635, 2013.Google Scholar

Brunero, John. Reasons and Evidence One Ought. Ethics 119(3):538–545, 2009.Google Scholar

Brunero, John. Reasons as Explanations. Philosophical Studies 165(3):805–824, 2013.Google Scholar

Brunero, John. Reasons, Evidence, and Explanations. In Star, Daniel (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Reasons and Normativity. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 321–341, 2018.Google Scholar

Chappell, Richard. Fittingness: The Sole Normative Primitive. Philosophical Quarterly 62:684–704, 2012.Google Scholar

Crawford, Lindsay. Believing the Best: On Doxastic Partiality in Friendship. Synthese 196(4):1575–1593, 2019.Google Scholar

Crisp, Roger. Review of ‘Value … and What Follows’ by Joel Kupperman. Philosophy 3:452–462, 2000.Google Scholar

D’Arms, Justin and Jacobson, Daniel. The Moralistic Fallacy: On the ‘Appropriateness’ of Emotions. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 61(1):65, 2000a.Google Scholar

D’Arms, Justin and Jacobson, Daniel. Sentiment and Value. Ethics 110(4):722–748, 2000b.Google Scholar

Dancy, Jonathan. Ethics without Principles. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004.Google Scholar

Davidson, Donald. Actions, Reasons and Causes. Journal of Philosophy 60:685–700, 1963.Google Scholar

Davidson, Donald. Actions et événements, translated by Pascal Engel, Paris: PUF, 1993.Google Scholar

Deonna, Julien A. and Teroni, Fabrice. The Emotions: A Philosophical Introduction. New York: Routledge, 2012.Google Scholar

Dietz, Christina. Are All Reasons Causes? Philosophical Studies 173(5):1179–1190, 2016.Google Scholar

Drucker, Daniel. Policy Externalism. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 98(2):261–285, 2019.Google Scholar

Dutant, Julien and Littlejohn, Clayton. Defeaters as Indicators of Ignorance. In Simion, Mona and Brown, Jessica (eds.), Reasons, Justification, and Defeat. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 233–246, 2021.Google Scholar

Echeverri, Santiago. Emotional Justification. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 98(3):541–566, 2019.Google Scholar

Engel, Pascal. Présentation. In Davidson 1993, translated by Engel, P., Paris: PUF, pp. v–xxxi, 1993.Google Scholar

Engel, Pascal. Truth and the Aim of Belief. In Gillies, Donald (ed.), Laws and Models in Science. London: King’s College Publications, pp. 77–97, 2004.Google Scholar

Engel, Pascal. Belief and Normativity. Disputatio, II(3):153–177, November 2007.Google Scholar

Engel, Pascal. In Defence of Normativism about the Aim of Belief. In Chan, Timothy (ed.), The Aim of Belief. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 32–63, 2013.Google Scholar

Engel, Pascal. Interprétation, reasons et faits. Critique 2015, 6(817–818):502–517, 2015aGoogle Scholar

Engel, Pascal. Retour à la raison. Revue Philosophique de la France Et de l’Etranger 140(3):359, 2015b.Google Scholar

Engel, Pascal. Les vices du savoir. Marseille: Agone, 2019.Google Scholar

Engel, Pascal. Le mauvais type de raison. In Langlet, B. and Monnoyer, J. M. (eds.), Raisons, La question méta-éthique: autour de l’oeuvre de John Skorupski. Aix-en-Provence: Presses Universitaires d’Aix-Marseille, pp. 145–165, 2020a.Google Scholar

Engel, Pascal. Contre le neo-pragmatisme doxastique. Klesis 45:1–30, 2020b.Google Scholar

Epley, Kelly. Emotions, Attitudes, and Reasons. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 100(1):256–282, 2018.Google Scholar

Faraci, David. We Have No Reason to Think There Are No Reasons for Affective Attitudes. Mind 129(513):225–234, 2020.Google Scholar

Fassio, Davide. The Aim of Belief. In The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2015, https://iep.utm.edu/beli-aim/.Google Scholar

Finlay, Stephen. The Reasons That Matter. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 84(1):1–20, 2006.Google Scholar

Finlay, Stephen. Explaining Reasons. Deutsches Jahrbuch Fuer Philosophie 4:112–126, 2012.Google Scholar

Finlay, Stephen. Confusion of Tongues: A Theory of Normative Language. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014.Google Scholar

Finlay, Stephen. A ‘Good’ Explanation of Five Puzzles about Reasons. Philosophical Perspectives, 33:62–104, 2020.Google Scholar

Fletcher, Guy. A Millian Objection to Reasons as Evidence. Utilitas 25(3):417–420, 2013.Google Scholar

Fogal, Daniel. Reasons, Reason, and Context. In Lord, Errol and Maguire, Barry (eds.), Weighing Reasons. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 74–103, 2016.Google Scholar

Fogal, Daniel and Sylvan, Kurt. Contextualism about Epistemic Reasons. In Ichikawa, Jonathan Jenkins (ed.), The Routledge Handbook to Epistemic Contextualism. London: Routledge, pp. 375–387, 2017.Google Scholar

Foley, Richard. Working without a Net: A Study of Egocentric Epistemology. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992.Google Scholar

Frege, Gottlob. Posthumous Writings. Edited by Hermes, H., Kambartel, F. and Kaulbach, F. and translated by P. Long and R. White. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1979.Google Scholar

Gendler, Tamar. On the Epistemic Costs of Implicit Bias. Philosophical Studies 156( 1):33–63, 2011.Google Scholar

Gertken, Jan and Kiesewetter, Benjamin. The Right and the Wrong Kind of Reasons. Philosophy Compass 12(5):e12412, 2017.Google Scholar

Gibbard, Allan. Wise Choices, Apt Feelings: A Theory of Normative Judgment. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1990.Google Scholar

Gibbons, John. The Norm of Belief. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.Google Scholar

Goldie, Peter. Emotions, Feelings and Intentionality. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 1(3):235–254, 2002.Google Scholar

Goldie, Peter. Emotion, Feeling, and Knowledge of the World. In Solomon, Robert C. (ed.), Thinking about Feeling: Contemporary Philosophers on Emotions. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 91–104, 2004.Google Scholar

Goldman, Alvin. What Is Justified Belief. In Pappas, George (ed.), Justification and Knowledge. Boston: D. Reidel, pp. 1–25, 1979.Google Scholar

Goldman, Alvin. Internalism, Externalism, and the Architecture of Justification. Journal of Philosophy 106(6):309–338, 2009.Google Scholar

Gordon, Robert M. The Structure of Emotions: Investigations in Cognitive Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987.Google Scholar

Greenspan, Patricia S. Emotions and Reasons: An Enquiry into Emotional Justification. New York: Routledge, 1988.Google Scholar

Gregory, Alex. Normative Reasons as Good Bases. Philosophical Studies 173(9):2291–2310, 2016.Google Scholar

Grice, H. Paul. Logic and Conversation. In Cole, P. and Morgan, J. L. (eds.), Syntax and Semantics, Volume 3: Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press, pp. 41–58, 1975.Google Scholar

Grice, H. Paul. Aspects of Reason. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.Google Scholar

Harman, Gilbert. Change in View. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1986.Google Scholar

Hawthorne, John. Knowledge and Evidence. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 70(2):452–458, 2005.Google Scholar

Hawthorne, John and Magidor, Ofra. Reflections on the Ideology of Reasons. In Star, Daniel (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Reasons and Normativity. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 113–143, 2018.Google Scholar

Hempel, Carl. Aspects of Scientific Explanation and Other Essays in the Philosophy of Science. New York: Free Press, 1965.Google Scholar

Hempel, Carl and Oppenheim, Paul. Studies in the Logic of Explanation. Philosophy of Science, 15:135–175, 1948. Reprinted in Hempel, 245–290, 1965.Google Scholar

Heuer, Ulrike. Reasons and Impossibility. Philosophical Studies 147(2):235–246, 2010.Google Scholar

Hieronymi, Pamela. The Wrong Kind of Reason. Journal of Philosophy 102(9):437–457, 2005.Google Scholar

Hieronymi, Pamela. The Use of Reasons in Thought (and the Use of Earmarks in Arguments). Ethics 124(1):114–127, 2013.Google Scholar

Horty, John F. Reasons as Defaults. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012.Google Scholar

Hughes, Nick. Luminosity Failure, Normative Guidance and the Principle ‘Ought-Implies-Can’. Utilitas 30(4):439–457, 2018.Google Scholar

James, William. The Will to Believe. The New World 5:327–347, 1896.Google Scholar

Kaplan, Mark. Williamson’s Casual Approach to Probabilism. In Pritchard, Duncan and Greenough, Patrick (eds.), Williamson on Knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 122–139, 2009.Google Scholar

Kearns, Stephen and Star, Daniel. Reasons: Explanations or Evidence? Ethics 119(1):31–56, 2008.Google Scholar

Kearns, Stephen and Star, Daniel. Reasons as Evidence. Oxford Studies in Metaethics 4:215–242, 2009.Google Scholar

Kearns, Stephen and Star, Daniel. Weighing Reasons. Journal of Moral Philosophy 10(1):70–86, 2013.Google Scholar

Kearns, Stephen and Star, Daniel. Weighing Explanations. In Hirose, Iwao and Reisner, Andrew (eds.), Weighing and Reasoning: Themes from the Philosophy of John Broome, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 232–251, 2015.Google Scholar

Keller, Simon. Friendship and Belief. Philosophical Papers 33(3):329–351, 2004.Google Scholar

Kelly, Thomas. The Rationality of Belief and Other Propositional Attitudes. Philosophical Studies 110:163–196, 2002.Google Scholar

Kelly, Thomas. 2003. Epistemic Rationality as Instrumental Rationality: A Critique. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 66(3):612–640.Google Scholar

Kelly, Thomas. Evidence. In Zalta, Edward N. (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2016 Edition), https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/evidence/, 2016.Google Scholar

Kennedy, Christopher. Projecting the Adjective: The Syntax and Semantics of Gradability and Comparison. New York: Garland. [Santa Cruz: University of California, Santa Cruz dissertation, 1997.] 1999 .Google Scholar

Kennedy, Christopher. Vagueness and Grammar: The Semantics of Relative and Absolute Gradable Adjectives. Linguistics and Philosophy 30(1):1–45, 2007.Google Scholar

Kennedy, Christopher and McNally, Louise. Scale Structure, Degree Modification, and the Semantics of Gradable Predicates. Language 81:345–381, 2005.Google Scholar

Kenny, Anthony J. Practical Inference. Analysis 26(3):65–75, 1966.Google Scholar

Kiesewetter, Benjamin. You Ought to ϕ Only if You May Believe that You Ought to ϕ. Philosophical Quarterly 66(265):760–782, 2016.Google Scholar

Kiesewetter, Benjamin. The Normativity of Rationality. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017.Google Scholar

Kiesewetter, Benjamin. How Reasons Are Sensitive to Available Evidence. In McHugh, Conor, Way, Jonathan and Whiting, Daniel (eds.), Normativity: Epistemic and Practical. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 90–114, 2018.Google Scholar

Kratzer, Angelika. The Notional Category of Modality. In Eikmeyer, Hans-Jürgen and Rieser, Hannes (eds.), Words, Worlds, and Contexts: New Approaches in Word Semantics (Research in Text Theory 6). Berlin: de Gruyter, pp. 38–74, 1981.Google Scholar

Lasonen‐Aarnio, Maria. Guidance, Epistemic Filters, and Non‐accidental Ought‐Doing. Philosophical Issues 29:172–183, 2019.Google Scholar

Lassiter, Daniel. Graded Modality: Qualitative and Quantitative Perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017.Google Scholar

Leary, Stephanie. In Defense of Practical Reasons for Belief. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 95(3):529–542, 2017.Google Scholar

Littlejohn, Clayton. Do Reasons and Evidence Share the Same Residence? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 93(3):720–727, 2016.Google Scholar

Livet, Pierre. Qu’est-ce qu’une action ? Paris: Vrin, 2005.Google Scholar

Logins, Artūrs. Save the Children! Analysis 76(4):418–422, 2016a.Google Scholar

Logins, Artūrs. Necessary Truths, Evidence, and Knowledge. Filosofia Unisinos 17(3):302–307, 2016b.Google Scholar

Logins, Artūrs. Common Sense and Evidence: Some Neglected Arguments in Favour of E=K. Theoria 83(2): 120–137, 2017.Google Scholar

Logins, Artūrs. Two-State Solution to the Lottery Paradox. Philosophical Studies 177(11):3465–3492, 2020a.Google Scholar

Logins, Artūrs. Is an Increase in Probability Always an Increase in Evidential Support? Erkenntnis, DOI:10.1007/s10670-020-00241-4, ahead-of-print: 1–25, 2020b.Google Scholar

Logins, Artūrs. How to Argue with a Pragmatist. Inquiry, DOI:10.1080/0020174X.2021.1919199, ahead-of-print: 1–16, 2021.Google Scholar

Lord, Errol. What You’re Rationally Required to Do and What You Ought to Do. Mind 126(504):1109–1154, 2017.Google Scholar

Lord, Errol and Maguire, Barry. An Opinionated Guide to the Weight of Reasons. In Lord, Errol and Maguire, Barry (eds.), Weighing Reasons. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 3–24, 2016.Google Scholar

Löschke, Jörg. Reasons to Act, Reasons to Require, and the Two-Level Theory of Moral Explanation. Philosophical Studies 178(1):169–185, 2021.Google Scholar

Maguire, Barry. The Value-Based Theory of Reasons. Ergo: An Open Access Journal of Philosophy 3:233–262, 2016.Google Scholar

Maguire, Barry. There Are No Reasons for Affective Attitudes. Mind 127(507):779–805, 2018.Google Scholar

Maguire, Barry and Woods, Jack. The Game of Belief. Philosophical Review 129(2):211–249, 2020.Google Scholar

Markovits, Julia. (2011a). Internal Reasons and the Motivating Intuition. In Brady, M. (ed.), New Waves in Metaethics, pp. 141–165. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar

Markovits, Julia. (2011b). Why Be an Internalist about Reasons? In Landau, R. S. (ed.), Oxford Studies in Metaethics, vol. 6, pp. 255–279. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Marušić, Berislav. Promising against the Evidence. Ethics 123(2):292–317, 2013.Google Scholar

McBride, Mark. Kearns and Star on Reasons as Evidence. Analytic Philosophy 54(2):229–236, 2013.Google Scholar

McCain, Kevin. Explanationist Evidentialism. Episteme 10(3):299–315, 2013.Google Scholar

McCain, Kevin. Explanationist Evidentialism: A Defense. In Kevin, McCain (ed.), Believing in Accordance with the Evidence. Cham: Springer, pp. 375–391, 2018.Google Scholar

McCormick, Miriam Schleifer. Believing against the Evidence: Agency and the Ethics of Belief. New York: Routledge, 2014.Google Scholar

McCormick, Miriam Schleifer. Can Beliefs Be Based on Practical Reasons? In Bondy, Pat and Carter, J. Adam (eds.), Well-Founded Belief: New Essays on the Epistemic Basing Relation. New York: Routledge, pp. 215–234, 2019.Google Scholar

McHugh, Conor and Way, Jonathan. Fittingness First. Ethics 126(3):575–606, 2016.Google Scholar

McKeever, Sean and Ridge, Michael. Elusive Reasons. Oxford Studies in Metaethics 7:110–137, 2012.Google Scholar

McKeon, Matthew W. On the Rationale for Distinguishing Arguments from Explanations. Argumentation 27:283–303, 2013.Google Scholar

McNaughton, David and Rawling, Piers. The Making/Evidential Reason Distinction. Analysis 71(1):100–102, 2011.Google Scholar

Melden, Abraham Irving. Free Action. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1961.Google Scholar

Mele, Alfred. Agents’ Abilities. Noûs 37:447–470, 2002.Google Scholar

Meylan, Anne. Justification et rationalité des émotions. Philosophiques 45(2):477, 2018.Google Scholar

Millgram, Elijah. Williams’ Argument against External Reasons. Noûs 30:197–220, 1996.Google Scholar

Mulligan, Kevin. From Appropriate Emotions to Values. The Monist, 81(1):161–188, 1998.Google Scholar

Na’aman, Oded. The Rationality of Emotional Change: Toward a Process View. Noûs 55(2):245–269, 2021.Google Scholar

Nair, Shyam. Conflicting Reasons, Unconflicting Ought’s. Philosophical Studies 173(3):629–663, 2016.Google Scholar

Nebel, Jacob M. Normative Reasons as Reasons Why We Ought. Mind 128(510):459–484, 2019.Google Scholar

Ogien, Ruwen. Les causes et les raisons. Nîmes: éditions Jacqueline Chambon, 1995.Google Scholar

Paakkunainen, Hille. Can There Be Government House Reasons for Action? Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy 12(1):56–93, 2017.Google Scholar

Paakkunainen, Hille. Internalism and Externalism about Reasons. In Star, Daniel (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Reasons and Normativity. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 143–170, 2018.Google Scholar

Parfit, Derek. On What Matters: Two-Volume Set. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011.Google Scholar

Pascal, Blaise. Pensées. Translated and edited by Kreilsheimer, A.. New York: Penguin, 1960/1995.Google Scholar

Pelser, Adam C. Emotion, Evaluative Perception, and Epistemic Justification. In Roeser, Sabine and Todd, Cain (eds.), Emotion and Value. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 106–122, 2014.Google Scholar

Pickard, Hanna. Responsibility without Blame for Addiction. Neuroethics 10(1):169–180, 2017.Google Scholar

Piller, Christian. Content-Related and Attitude-Related Reasons for Preferences. Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 59:155–182, 2006.Google Scholar

Pollock, John. Contemporary Theories of Knowledge. Savage, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 1986.Google Scholar

Potsdam, Eric, and Edmiston, Daniel. Imperatives. In Aronoff, Mark (ed.), Oxford Bibliographies in Linguistics. New York: Oxford University Press, 2015.Google Scholar

Preston-Roedder, Ryan. Faith in Humanity. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 87(3):664–687, 2013.Google Scholar

Prior, Mary and Prior, Arthur. Erotetic Logic. The Philosophical Review 64(1):43–59, 1955.Google Scholar

Pryor, James. The Skeptic and the Dogmatist. Noûs 34(4):517–549, 2000.Google Scholar

Rabinowicz, Wlodek and Rønnow-Rasmussen, Toni. The Strike of the Demon: On Fitting Pro-attitudes and Value. Ethics 114:391–423, 2004.Google Scholar

Raz, Joseph (ed.). Practical Reasoning. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1978.Google Scholar

Raz, Joseph. Practical Reason and Norms, 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999.Google Scholar

Reisner, Andrew. Weighing Pragmatic and Evidential Reasons for Belief. Philosophical Studies 138(1):17–27, 2008.Google Scholar

Reisner, Andrew. The Possibility of Pragmatic Reasons for Belief and the Wrong Kind of Reasons Problem. Philosophical Studies 145(2):257–272, 2009.Google Scholar

Reisner, Andrew. Normative Conflicts and the Structure of Normativity. In Hirose, Iwao and Reisner, Andrew (eds.), Weighing and Reasoning: Themes from the Work of John Broome. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 189–206, 2015.Google Scholar

Reisner, Andrew. Pragmatic Reasons for Belief. In Star, Daniel (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Reasons and Normativity. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 705–728, 2018.Google Scholar

Rinard, Susanna. Against the New Evidentialists. Philosophical Issues 25(1):208–223, 2015.Google Scholar

Rinard, Susanna. No Exception for Belief. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 94(1):121–143, 2017.Google Scholar

Rinard, Susanna. Believing for Practical Reasons. Noûs 53(4):763–784, 2018.Google Scholar

Rinard, Susanna. Equal Treatment for Belief. Philosophical Studies 176(7):1923–1950, 2019.Google Scholar

Ross, W. David. The Right and the Good. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1930.Google Scholar

Rossi, Benjamin Cohen. Introducing a New Elusive Reason. Ratio 34(3):227–235, 2021.Google Scholar

Rowland, Richard. The Normative and the Evaluative: The Buck-Passing Account of Value. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019.Google Scholar

Salmon, Wesley. Statistical Explanation. In Salmon, W. (ed.), Statistical Explanation and Statistical Relevance. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, pp. 29–87, 1971.Google Scholar

vos Savant, M. Ask Marylin. New York: St. Martin’s, 1992.Google Scholar

Scanlon, Thomas M. What We Owe to Each Other. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1998.Google Scholar

Scanlon, Thomas M. Being Realistic about Reasons. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014.Google Scholar

Scarantino, Andrea and de Sousa, Ronald. Emotion. In Zalta, Edward N. (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2018 Edition), https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2018/entries/emotion/, 2018.Google Scholar

Schmidt, Eva. New Trouble for ‘Reasons as Evidence’: Means That Don’t Justify the Ends. Ethics 127(3):708–718, 2017.Google Scholar

Schroeder, Mark. Slaves of the Passions. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.Google Scholar

Schroeder, Mark. Having Reasons. Philosophical Studies 139(1):57–71, 2008.Google Scholar

Schroeder, Mark. The Ubiquity of State-Given Reasons. Ethics 122(3):457–488, 2012.Google Scholar

Schroeder, Mark. State-Given Reasons: Prevalent, If Not Ubiquitous. Ethics 124(1):128–140, 2013.Google Scholar

Schroeter, Laura and Schroeter, François. Reasons as Right-Makers. Philosophical Explorations 12(3):279–296, 2009.Google Scholar

Setiya, Kieran. Reasons without Rationalism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2007.Google Scholar

Setiya, Kieran. Reply to Bratman and Smith. Analysis 69(3):531–540, 2009.Google Scholar

Setiya, Kieran. What Is a Reason to Act?. Philosophical Studies 167(2):221–235, 2014.Google Scholar

Shafer-Landau, Russ. Moral Realism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.Google Scholar

Shah, Nishi. How Truth Governs Belief. Philosophical Review 112(4):447–482, 2003.Google Scholar

Shah, Nishi. A New Argument for Evidentialism. Philosophical Quarterly 56:481–498, 2006.Google Scholar

Shah, Nishi and Velleman, J. David. Doxastic Deliberation. Philosophical Review 114(4):497–534, 2005.Google Scholar

Sher, Itai. Comparative Value and the Weight of Reasons. Economics and Philosophy 35:103–158, 2019.Google Scholar

Silverstein, Matthew. Reducing Reasons. Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy 10(1):1–22, 2016.Google Scholar

Sinclair, Neil. Promotionalism, Motivationalism and Reasons to Perform Physically Impossible Actions. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 15:647–659, 2012.Google Scholar

Singer, Peter. Famine, Affluence, and Morality. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1(3):229–243, 1972.Google Scholar

Skorupski, John. The Domain of Reasons. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010.Google Scholar

Smith, Michael. The Moral Problem. Oxford: Blackwell, 1994.Google Scholar

Smith, Michael. Internal Reasons. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 55(1):109–131, 1995.Google Scholar

Smith, Michael. Reasons with Rationalism after All. Analysis Reviews 69:521–530, 2009.Google Scholar

Smithies, Declan. Moore’s Paradox and the Accessibility of Justification. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 85(2):273–300, 2012.Google Scholar

Smithies, Declan. Reasons and Perception. In Star, Daniel (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Reasons and Normativity. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 632–661, 2018.Google Scholar

Snedegar, Justin. Contrastive Reasons. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017.Google Scholar

Sobel, David. Explanation, Internalism, and Reasons for Action. Social Philosophy and Policy 18:218–235, 2001.Google Scholar

de Sousa, Ronald. The Rationality of Emotion, vol. 100. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1987.Google Scholar

de Sousa, Ronald B. Emotional Truth: Ronald de Sousa. Supplement to the Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 76(1):247–263, 2002.Google Scholar

Srinivasan, Amia. Normativity without Cartesian Privilege. Philosophical Issues 25(1):273–299, 2015.Google Scholar

Star, Daniel. Reasoning with Reasons. In Way, Jonathan, McHugh, Conor and Whiting, Daniel (eds.), Normativity: Epistemic and Practical. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 241–259, 2018.Google Scholar

Steglich-Petersen, Asbjørn and Skipper, Mattias. An Instrumentalist Account of How to Weigh Epistemic and Practical Reasons for Belief. Mind, 129(516): 1071–1094, 2020.Google Scholar

Stroud, Sarah. Epistemic Partiality in Friendship. Ethics 116(3):498–524, 2006.Google Scholar

Streumer, Bart. Reasons and Impossibility. Philosophical Studies 136(3):351–384, 2007.Google Scholar

Sylvan, Kurt. Epistemic Reasons I: Normativity. Philosophy Compass 11(7):364–376, 2016.Google Scholar

Timmerman, Travis. Sometimes There Is Nothing Wrong with Letting a Child Drown. Analysis 75(2):204–212, 2015.Google Scholar

Velleman, J. David. Practical Reflection. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, online version, 1999 (originally 1989).Google Scholar

Velleman, J. David. On the Aim of Belief. Chapter 11 In Velleman, J. David (ed.), The Possibility of Practical Reason. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 244–281, 2000.Google Scholar

Way, Jonathan. Transmission and the Wrong Kind of Reason. Ethics 122(3):489–515, 2012.Google Scholar

Way, Jonathan. Value and Reasons to Favour. Oxford Studies in Metaethics 8:27–49, 2013.Google Scholar

Way, Jonathan. Two Arguments for Evidentialism. Philosophical Quarterly 66(265):805–818, 2016.Google Scholar

Way, Jonathan. Reasons as Premises of Good Reasoning. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 98:251–270. DOI: 10.1111/papq.12135, 2017.Google Scholar

Way, Jonathan. Reasons and Rationality. In Star, Daniel (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Reasons and Normativity. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 485–503, 2018.Google Scholar

Way, Jonathan and Whiting, Daniel. Reasons and Guidance. Analytic Philosophy 57(3):214–235, 2016.Google Scholar

Wedgwood, Ralph. The Aim of Belief. Philosophical Perspectives 16:267–297, 2002.Google Scholar

Wedgwood, Ralph. The Right Thing to Believe. In Chan, Timothy (ed.), The Aim of Belief. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 123–139, 2013.Google Scholar

Wedgwood, Ralph. The Pitfalls of ‘Reasons’. Philosophical Issues 25(1):123–143, 2015.Google Scholar

Whately, Richard. Elements of Logic. Delmar, NY: Scholars’ Facsimiles & Reprints, 1827/1975.Google Scholar

Whately, Richard. Elements of Rhetoric, 7th ed. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, 1828/1846.Google Scholar

Whiting, Daniel. Right in Some Respects: Reasons as Evidence. Philosophical Studies 175(9):2191–2208, 2018.Google Scholar

Wiland, Eric. Reasons. London: Continuum, 2012.Google Scholar

Williams, Bernard. Deciding to Believe. In Williams, Bernard (ed.), Problems of the Self: Philosophical Papers 1956–1972. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 136–151, 1973.Google Scholar

Williams, Bernard. Internal and External Reasons. In Harrison, Ross (ed.), Rational Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 101–113, 1979.Google Scholar

Williams, Bernard. Moral Luck: Philosophical Papers 1973–1980. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981.Google Scholar

Williams, Bernard. Internal Reasons and the Obscurity of Blame. In Prior, William J. (ed.), Reason and Moral Judgment, Logos, vol. 10. Santa Clara, CA: Santa Clara University, 1989.Google Scholar

Williams, Bernard. Postscript: Some Further Notes on Internal and External Reasons. In Millgram, E. (ed.), Varieties of Practical Reasoning. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 91–97, 2001.Google Scholar

Williamson, Timothy. Knowledge and Its Limits. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.Google Scholar

Wittgenstein, Ludwig. The Blue and Brown Books (BB). Oxford: Blackwell, 1958.Google Scholar

Wodak, Daniel. Redundant Reasons. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 98(2):266–278, 2020.Google Scholar

Wright, Crispin. Warrant for Nothing (and Foundations for Free)? Aristotelian Society Supplementary 78(1):167–212, 2004.Google Scholar

Book contents

References

Summary

References

Save book to Kindle

Save book to Dropbox

Save book to Google Drive