Are Hard Choices Cases of Incomparability
نویسنده
چکیده
This paper presents an argument against the widespread view that ‘hard choices’ are hard because of the incomparability of the alternatives. The argument has two parts. First, I argue that any plausible theory of practical reason must be ‘comparativist’ in form, that is, it must hold that a comparative relation between the alternatives with respect to what matters in the choice determines a justified choice in that situation. If comparativist views of practical reason are correct, however, the incomparabilist view of hard choices should be rejected. Incomparabilism about hard choices leads to an implausible error theory about the phenomenology of hard choices, threatens an unattractive view of human agency, and leaves us in perplexity about what we are doing when we choose in hard choices. The second part of the argument explores the main competitor to comparativist views of practical reason, the noncomparativist view, according to which a choice is justified so long as it is not worse than any of the alternatives. This view is often assumed by rational choice theorists, but has its best philosophical defense in work by Joseph Raz. On Raz’s noncomparativist view, incomparabilism about hard choices avoids the problems faced if comparativism is correct, but it faces different difficulties. I argue that Raz’s noncomparativist view mistakenly assimilates practical reason to more restricted normative domains such as the law.
منابع مشابه
گونهشناسی مفهومی در پرستشگاههای یهودیان، مسیحیان و مسلمانان در دورهی صفویهی اصفهان (بر اساس ویژگیهای قدسی تنزیه، تشبیه، جمال و جلال)
Places of worship, as symbolic spaces, have played a key role in all religions. In this respect, they differ from other buildings with different functions. However, the presence of places of worship belonging to different religions in the same city or town has been based on identity differentiations. Given the rapidly growing virtual communications in today›s world, it has become even more impo...
متن کاملPhilosophical Aspects of Incommensurability and Incomparability
Ex ante decision analysis has other problems than ex post analysis. One of the problems is the nature of the value system of the deciding person. Mostly, it will contain different values (criteria, points of view) which are not reducible to one measure. These cases of incommensurability are one reason for the incomparability of the decision options. There are other reasons why it seems highly u...
متن کاملUNCERTAINTY DATA CREATING INTERVAL-VALUED FUZZY RELATION IN DECISION MAKING MODEL WITH GENERAL PREFERENCE STRUCTURE
The paper introduces a new approach to preference structure, where from a weak preference relation derive the following relations:strict preference, indifference and incomparability, which by aggregations and negations are created and examined. We decomposing a preference relation into a strict preference, anindifference, and an incomparability relation.This approach allows one to quantify diff...
متن کاملSolving Bi-objective Model of Hotel Revenue Management Considering Customer Choice Behavior Using Meta-heuristic Algorithms
The problem of maximizing the benefit from a specified number of a particular product with respect to the behavior of customer choices is regarded as revenue management. This managerial technique was first adopted by the airline industries before being widely used by many others such as hotel industries. The scope of this research is mainly focused on hotel revenue management, regarding which a...
متن کاملUnit Incomparability Dimension and Clique Cover Width in Graphs
For a clique cover C in the undirected graph G, the clique cover graph of C is the graph obtained by contracting the vertices of each clique in C into a single vertex. The clique cover width of G, denoted by CCW (G), is the minimum value of the bandwidth of all clique cover graphs in G. Any G with CCW (G) = 1 is known to be an incomparability graph, and hence is called, a unit incomparability g...
متن کامل