Cargando…

An alternative norm of intention consistency

In this paper, I formulate a norm of intention consistency that is immune to the kind of cases that have been put forth to argue either that rationality does not require consistency between an agent's intentions, or that, if it does, then rationality is not normative. The norm I formulate mimic...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Núñez, Carlos
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7540264/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33042637
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tht3.453
_version_ 1783591168065404928
author Núñez, Carlos
author_facet Núñez, Carlos
author_sort Núñez, Carlos
collection PubMed
description In this paper, I formulate a norm of intention consistency that is immune to the kind of cases that have been put forth to argue either that rationality does not require consistency between an agent's intentions, or that, if it does, then rationality is not normative. The norm I formulate mimics refinements that have been made to the norm of means‐end coherence in response to cases where, intuitively, you need not be irrational when you intend an end e, despite not intending the means m you believe to be necessary for e, because you do not believe that intending m is necessary for e. Similarly, according to the norm I put forth, if you intend e, and believe that e is inconsistent with e*, you need not be irrational if you also intend e*, as long as you do not believe that intending e* is inconsistent with e.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7540264
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-75402642020-10-09 An alternative norm of intention consistency Núñez, Carlos Thought (Hoboken) Original Articles In this paper, I formulate a norm of intention consistency that is immune to the kind of cases that have been put forth to argue either that rationality does not require consistency between an agent's intentions, or that, if it does, then rationality is not normative. The norm I formulate mimics refinements that have been made to the norm of means‐end coherence in response to cases where, intuitively, you need not be irrational when you intend an end e, despite not intending the means m you believe to be necessary for e, because you do not believe that intending m is necessary for e. Similarly, according to the norm I put forth, if you intend e, and believe that e is inconsistent with e*, you need not be irrational if you also intend e*, as long as you do not believe that intending e* is inconsistent with e. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 2020-04-06 2020-09 /pmc/articles/PMC7540264/ /pubmed/33042637 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tht3.453 Text en © 2020 The Author. Thought: A Journal of Philosophy published by The Thought Trust and Wiley Periodicals, Inc. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Núñez, Carlos
An alternative norm of intention consistency
title An alternative norm of intention consistency
title_full An alternative norm of intention consistency
title_fullStr An alternative norm of intention consistency
title_full_unstemmed An alternative norm of intention consistency
title_short An alternative norm of intention consistency
title_sort alternative norm of intention consistency
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7540264/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33042637
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tht3.453
work_keys_str_mv AT nunezcarlos analternativenormofintentionconsistency
AT nunezcarlos alternativenormofintentionconsistency