Philosophy Lexicon of Arguments

Author Item Excerpt Meta data

Books on Amazon
II 334 ff
Rationality/Evolution Theory: does not explain why physical state r causes movement b - (if R is the corresponding rational reason and B the rational action) - Nozick: if R is not a rational reason there would be no organism that would be selected for it - (s) because irrational organisms are not selected, one could not recognize rational behavior particularly and describe it(DF).
II 338
Nozick: nevertheless: if r would not be rational, the organism would not have been selected - "downward causation" - so after all: rationality in the world.
II 342
Theory of evolution/Nozick: seems to eliminate values and evaluative facts - even if action is related to belief, it is not in connection with judgmental facts.
III 343
instead, - "invisible hand, blind mechanism" - Ethical behavior could be inherit - "Punchline: that does not undermine the role of ethical facts -" explanation: individual behavior is not - "explained blind" - solution: in addition one needs truth for explanation (DF).
II 348
Moral belief must ultimately be in connection with its truth - but that does not show that from a successful explanation of the invisible hand (blind explanation) could not follow that there may be no connection with accuracy.

Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution.

No I
R. Nozick
Philosophical Explanations Oxford 1981

R., Nozick
The Nature of Rationality 1994

> Counter arguments against Nozick
> Counter arguments in relation to Evolution

> Suggest your own contribution | > Suggest a correction | > Export as BibTeX Datei
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2017-06-23