Christian Wolff über motivierende Gründe und handlungsrelevante Irrtümer

Abstract In this paper, I discuss Christian Wolff’s conception of motivating and normative reasons. My aim is to show that in the discussion error cases, Wolff pursues a strategy strikingly similar contemporary defenders nicht-psychologist accounts According many views, reasons are facts. motivation pursuing very different. The point due his commitment Principle Sufficient Reason, has cases compatible with PSR. issue worth discussing because it not yet sufficiently explored what are, according Wolff, how they relate, substance, Methodologically, my approach can be characterized as one “mutual illumination”: think possible highlight some crucial ambiguities against backdrop reasons, but also question importance role ontological discussions position.