100% satisfaction guarantee Immediately available after payment Both online and in PDF No strings attached
logo-home
Does McDowell’s Discussion of the Idea of ‘Conversion’ Offer a Satisfactory Response to Williams’ Explanation Challenge? $4.49
Add to cart

Essay

Does McDowell’s Discussion of the Idea of ‘Conversion’ Offer a Satisfactory Response to Williams’ Explanation Challenge?

 293 views  0 purchase
  • Course
  • Institution

Essay of 12 pages for the course Actions, Reasons, Values at UoW

Preview 3 out of 12  pages

  • November 19, 2014
  • 12
  • 2013/2014
  • Essay
  • Unknown
  • Unknown
avatar-seller
1111901




Does McDowell’s Discussion of the Idea of ‘Conversion’

Offer a Satisfactory Response to Williams’ Explanation Challenge?




Table of contents:

1. Introduction page 3

2. Section 1: Williams’ explanation challenge 3

3. Section 2: McDowell’s discussion of conversion 6

4. Section 3: A satisfactory response? 8

5. Conclusion 12

Bibliography 12




Word count (excluding bibliography): 2,638 words




1

,1111901




Does McDowell’s Discussion of the Idea of ‘Conversion’ Offer a Satisfactory

Response to Williams’ Explanation Challenge?




In order to determine whether McDowell’s discussion of the idea of

‘conversion’ offers a satisfactory response to Williams’ explanation challenge, the

challenge itself must be set in context. Williams’ challenge is designed to refute

reason-externalism, the claim that ‘A has a reason to x’ is not related to A’s

motives1. It does this on the grounds that externalism cannot adequately explain

reasons for action2. McDowell’s discussion of the idea of ‘conversion’ is a response

to this argument, which defends reason-externalism but ultimately has its own

failings. Overall it will be seen that McDowell misses the point of Williams’

challenge, by failing to take the connection between reasons and explanation

seriously, so cannot offer a satisfactory response.




Section 1: Williams’ explanation challenge



Williams’ explanation challenge is designed to support reason-internalism by

showing that reason-externalism cannot plausibly account for reasons for action.

Reason-internalism is the claim that whenever ‘A has a reason to x’ entails that A

has a motive to x3. This contrasts reason-externalism, according to which the claim


1
McDowell, J (1995) pg 70-72
2
Williams, B (1981) pg 102
3
McDowell, J (1995) pg 70-72

2

, 1111901


whenever ‘A has a reason to x’ is not related to A’s motives.4 For example, a reason-

internalist would say that ‘Tallulah has a reason to write her essay’ entails that

Tallulah has a motive to write her essay, whereas a reason-externalist would make

no such claim. Williams elaborates on reason-internalism by claiming that A can

only have a reason to x if ‘doing x’ can be reached by deliberative reasoning from

elements of A’s subjective motivation set.5 This set consists of desires; ‘dispositions

of evaluation, patterns of emotional reaction, personal loyalties’ and other such

internal features of A.6 So to say that Tallulah has a reason to write her essay is to

say that Tallulah is motivated to write her essay based on the fact that her subjective

motivational set contains a relevant element, perhaps the desire to do well in her

degree, and she reasons that writing her essay will enable her to achieve this desire.

If she did not have the relevant desire, she would not be motivated to write her essay

and so would not have a reason to. This is what it means for a reason statement to be

internal, and Williams claims that these can be the only kinds of reason statements

concerning action.



The challenge Williams poses to reason-externalism is that external reasons

cannot possibly explain action. Reasons for action intuitively have an explanatory

role; ‘if there are reasons for action, it must be that people sometimes act for those

reasons, and if they do, their reasons must figure in some correct explanation of their

action’.7 For example if Tallulah has a reason to write her essay, this reason must be

able to explain the fact that she goes on to write her essay. Reason-internalism, as

demonstrated, explains this by Tallulah’s deliberation from something in her


4
ibid
5
Williams, B (1995) pg 187
6
Williams, B (1981) pg 105
7
ibid pg 102

3

The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.

Quick and easy check-out

Quick and easy check-out

You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.

Focus on what matters

Focus on what matters

Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!

Frequently asked questions

What do I get when I buy this document?

You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.

Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?

Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.

Who am I buying these notes from?

Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller julzmcotton. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.

Will I be stuck with a subscription?

No, you only buy these notes for $4.49. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.

Can Stuvia be trusted?

4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)

53068 documents were sold in the last 30 days

Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy study notes for 14 years now

Start selling
$4.49
  • (0)
Add to cart
Added