艰难抉择有什么难的?

Q2 Arts and Humanities Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics Pub Date : 2024-07-11 DOI:10.23941/ejpe.v17i1.872
Ruth Chang
{"title":"艰难抉择有什么难的?","authors":"Ruth Chang","doi":"10.23941/ejpe.v17i1.872","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"What, exactly, is so hard about hard choices? I suggest that what is distinctively hard about hard choices is that they present us with the volitional difficulty of putting ourselves behind an alternative and thereby making it true of ourselves that we have most reason to do one thing rather than another. Making it true through your commitments that, for instance, you have most reason to be a philosopher rather than a lawyer makes the choice between the careers hard. This answer is in contrast to that of Sergio Tenenbaum, who understands the hardness of a hard choice as a deliberative difficulty in specifying our alternatives and ends in ways that conform with certain proposed constraints of rationality. For Tenenbaum, the hardness of hard choices is not distinctive to such choices but is a general difficulty rational agents face when they need to further specify their alternatives and ends, even if the choice is easy.","PeriodicalId":37914,"journal":{"name":"Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What’s so Hard about Hard Choices?\",\"authors\":\"Ruth Chang\",\"doi\":\"10.23941/ejpe.v17i1.872\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"What, exactly, is so hard about hard choices? I suggest that what is distinctively hard about hard choices is that they present us with the volitional difficulty of putting ourselves behind an alternative and thereby making it true of ourselves that we have most reason to do one thing rather than another. Making it true through your commitments that, for instance, you have most reason to be a philosopher rather than a lawyer makes the choice between the careers hard. This answer is in contrast to that of Sergio Tenenbaum, who understands the hardness of a hard choice as a deliberative difficulty in specifying our alternatives and ends in ways that conform with certain proposed constraints of rationality. For Tenenbaum, the hardness of hard choices is not distinctive to such choices but is a general difficulty rational agents face when they need to further specify their alternatives and ends, even if the choice is easy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37914,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.23941/ejpe.v17i1.872\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23941/ejpe.v17i1.872","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

艰难抉择究竟难在哪里?我认为,艰难抉择的独特艰难之处在于,它们给我们带来了意志上的困难,即我们必须将自己置于某种选择的背后,从而使自己确信,我们最有理由做一件事而不是另一件事。例如,通过你的承诺,使你最有理由成为哲学家而不是律师,这就使得在这两种职业之间做出选择变得困难。这个答案与塞尔吉奥-特南鲍姆的答案截然不同,他将 "艰难选择 "的艰难性理解为一种慎思的困难,即以符合某些拟议的理性约束的方式明确我们的选择和目的。在特嫩鲍姆看来,困难选择的困难性并不是这类选择所特有的,而是理性主体在需要进一步明确其选择和目的时所面临的一般困难,即使选择是容易的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
What’s so Hard about Hard Choices?
What, exactly, is so hard about hard choices? I suggest that what is distinctively hard about hard choices is that they present us with the volitional difficulty of putting ourselves behind an alternative and thereby making it true of ourselves that we have most reason to do one thing rather than another. Making it true through your commitments that, for instance, you have most reason to be a philosopher rather than a lawyer makes the choice between the careers hard. This answer is in contrast to that of Sergio Tenenbaum, who understands the hardness of a hard choice as a deliberative difficulty in specifying our alternatives and ends in ways that conform with certain proposed constraints of rationality. For Tenenbaum, the hardness of hard choices is not distinctive to such choices but is a general difficulty rational agents face when they need to further specify their alternatives and ends, even if the choice is easy.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics
Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: The Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics (EJPE) is a peer-reviewed bi-annual academic journal supported by the Erasmus Institute for Philosophy and Economics at the Erasmus School of Philosophy of Erasmus University Rotterdam. EJPE publishes research on the methodology, history, ethics, and interdisciplinary relations of economics, and welcomes contributions from all scholars with an interest in any of its research domains. EJPE is an Open Access Journal: all the content is permanently available online without subscription or payment. EJPE aims to... -Publish high quality original research on the intersection of philosophy and economics. -Support the inter-disciplinary development of the field with critical survey papers covering ongoing debates and information about relevant publications. -Provide a forum that is friendly to young scholars, and supported by an authoritative, efficient, and constructive review process.
期刊最新文献
Carbon Offsets and Concerns about Shifting Harms: A Reply to Mintz-Woo Review of Stephen Engelmann’s Economic Rationality: What is Political Economy? Cambridge, UK: Polity, 2022, 144 pages. Editorial Note Review of Thomas Nagel’s Moral Feelings, Moral Reality, and Moral Progress. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2023, v + 70 pp. Intergenerational Cooperation and Justice between Age Groups
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1