The Case for Stance-Dependent Reasons

Abstract

Many philosophers maintain that neither one’s reasons for action nor one’s well-being are ever grounded in facts about what we desire or favor. Yet our reason to eat a flavor of ice cream we like rather than one we do not seems an obvious counterexample. I argue that there is no getting around such examples and that therefore a fully stance-independent account of the grounding of our reasons is implausible. At least in matters of mere taste, our “stance” plays a normative role in grounding reasons.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 44 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.