Silencing Desires?

Philosophia 41 (3):887-903 (2013)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
In an overlooked section of his influential book What We Owe to Each Other Thomas Scanlon advances an argument against the desire-model of practical reasoning. In Scanlon’s view the model gives a distorted picture of the structure of our practical thinking. His idea is that there is an alternative to the “weighing behavior” of reasons, a particular way in which reasons can relate to each other. This phenomenon, which the paper calls “silencing”, is not something that the desire-model can accommodate, or so Scanlon argues. The paper first presents and interprets Scanlon’s challenge. After this, the paper argues, through the examination of three responses, that Scanlon is right in claiming that the model cannot accommodate the phenomenon as he describes it. However, the paper further argues that there is no need to accept Scanlon’s depiction of silencing: advocates of the model can give an alternative account of what happens in cases of silencing that is just as plausible as Scanlon’s own. Scanlon’s challenge is thus, the paper concludes, illegitimate.
(categorize this paper)
Reprint years
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Revision history
First archival date: 2015-11-21
Latest version: 2 (2016-02-13)
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
What We Owe to Each Other.Scanlon, Thomas M.

View all 39 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Added to PP index

Total views
281 ( #15,599 of 48,961 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
36 ( #19,510 of 48,961 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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