Possessing Reasons: Why the Awareness-First Approach is Better Than the Knowledge-First Approach

Synthese (forthcoming)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
In order for a reason to justify an action or attitude it must be one that is possessed by an agent. Knowledge-centric views of possession ground our possession of reasons, at least partially, either in our knowledge of them or in our being in a position to know them. But on virtually all accounts, knowing P is some kind of non-accidental true belief that P. This entails that knowing P is a kind of non-accidental true representation that P. I outline a novel theory of the epistemic requirement on possession in terms of this more general state of non-accidental true representation. It is just as well placed to explain the motivations behind knowledge-centric views of possession, and it is also better placed to explain the extent of the reasons we possess in certain cases of deductive belief-updates and cases involving environmental luck. I conclude with three reflections. First, I indicate how my arguments generate a dilemma for Lord's (2018) view that possessing reasons is just a matter of being in a position to manifest one's knowledge how to use them. Second, I explain how my view can simultaneously manage cases of environmental luck without falling prey to lottery cases. Finally, I sketch the direction for a further range of counterexamples to knowledge-centric theories of possession.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Upload history
First archival date: 2020-09-14
Latest version: 4 (2020-09-17)
View other versions
Added to PP index

Total views
23 ( #50,770 of 52,650 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
23 ( #27,038 of 52,650 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.