Reply to Persson: Intransitivity and the Internal Aspects View

Mostra el registre complet Registre parcial de l'ítem

• dc.contributor.author Temkin, Larryca
• dc.date.accessioned 2016-05-23T15:57:21Z
• dc.date.available 2016-05-23T15:57:21Z
• dc.date.issued 2014ca
• dc.date.modified 2015-09-25T11:55:17Zca
• dc.description.abstract This article responds to Ingmar Persson’s article “Internal or External Grounds for the Nontransitivity of ‘Better/Worse than’”. In his article, Persson argues in favor of an account of supervenience that would be compatible with both an Internal Aspects View, and the nontransitivity of the “better or worse than” relations. This article points out that the Internal Aspects View that Persson favors would fail to capture many features of practical reasoning that most advocates of an Internal Aspects View favor, and that the version of the Internal Aspects View that I discuss in Rethinking the Good does capture. I note, however, that Persson’s view would not only be compatible with my book’s main claims and arguments, it would substantially buttress my results. Accordingly, I would welcome it if Persson could successfully develop and defend his view. Unfortunately, however, my article raises a number of worries about Persson’s view. I consider various different ways of understanding Persson’s position, and argue that none of them ultimately succeed in establishing a plausible version of a genuinely Internal Aspects View that would be compatible with the nontransitivity of the “better or worse than” relations. I acknowledge that if Persson can ultimately make good on his claims, he will have made a substantial contribution to our understanding of the good and the nature of ideals. However, as matters now stand, I am not moved by his arguments to revise the claims I made in Rethinking the Good, correlating the nontransitivity of the “better or worse than” relations with the Essentially Comparative View, rather than the Internal Aspects View.ca
• dc.format application/pdfca
• dc.identifier http://www.raco.cat/index.php/LEAP/article/view/297562ca
• dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10230/26739
• dc.language.iso engca
• dc.publisher Universitat Pompeu Fabraca
• dc.relation.haspart http://www.raco.cat/index.php/LEAP/article/view/297562/386550ca
• dc.rights.uri The authors transfers a non exclusive rights of distribution, public communication and reproduction of his or her work for publication in Law, Ethics and Philosophy (LEAP) and inclusion in databases in which the journal is indexed.ca
• dc.source.uri Law, Ethics and Philosophy; 2014: Núm. 2; p. 139-152ca
• dc.source.uri Law, Ethics and Philosophy; 2014: Núm. 2; p. 139-152ca
• dc.subject.other Transitivity, Nontransitivity, Internal Aspects View, Essentially Comparative View, Practical Reasoning, Better than, Supervenience.ca
• dc.title Reply to Persson: Intransitivity and the Internal Aspects Viewca
• dc.type info:eu-repo/semantics/article
• dc.type info:eu-repo/semantics/articleca
• dc.type info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionca