This website uses cookies to ensure you have the best experience. Learn more

Rationality And Inconsistent Beliefs Essay

3308 words - 13 pages

Many believe that there is something inherently irrational about accepting each element
of an inconsistent set of propositions. However, arguments for this doctrine seem lacking
other than those that appeal to the principle that the set of propositions that one rationally
accepts is (or should be) closed under logical consequences, or those that note that error
is made inevitable when one accepts an inconsistent set. After explaining why the
preceding sorts of arguments do not succeed, I consider a novel attempt by Keith Lehrer
to undermine the chief argument in favor of the claim that it can sometimes be rational to
accept inconsistent sets. For reasons that will be described, Lehrer’s argument fails.
I. Inconsistency and Deductive Closure
One cannot accept both that it is rational to accept inconsistent sets, and that the set of
propositions that one rationally accepts is closed under logical consequences. Together
these two propositions imply that it is rational to knowingly accept a logically
contradictory statement. But clearly it is not rational to knowingly accept a contradiction.
Thus, we must give up the principle that our rational acceptances are closed under logical
consequences, or else deny that it is ever rational to accept an inconsistent set. This
dilemma is sometimes appealed to as a premise in an argument for the claim that it is
irrational to accept each element of an inconsistent set. According to this argument, since
our rational acceptances are closed under logical consequences, it must be irrational to
Page 2
Rationality and Inconsistent Beliefs
accept inconsistent sets. Versions of this argument have recently been offered by Ryan
(1996) and Evnine (1999).
The preceding sort of argument is unacceptable because our rational acceptances
are not closed under logical consequences. The conjunction of a set of propositions that
are each individually well confirmed (and thereby rational to accept) need not be well
confirmed. So assuming that it is rational to accept propositions whose probability is less
than one, it follows that our rational acceptances are not closed under logical
consequences, or that it is rational to accept propositions that are not well confirmed.
Clearly, it is not rational to accept propositions that are not well confirmed. It follows
that our rational acceptances are not closed under logical consequences.
Deductive closure has also been appealed to in making the argument that in cases
where each element of an inconsistent set is probable, the elements of the set interact and
defeat one another. For example, John Pollock appeals to the claim that our set of
rational acceptances are closed under logical consequences in order to defend what he
calls “the principle of collective defeat”.(62) Pollock calls a set minimal inconsistent
provided that it is inconsistent, but has no inconsistent proper subsets. The principle of
collective defeat states that the least well...

Find Another Essay On Rationality and Inconsistent Beliefs

A Personal Application of Theory Essay

1311 words - 5 pages There is not a day where my own life lacks social events. A basic day consists of going to work or school, completing homework, and attempting to have a social life with those who are important to me. Being able to manage my social self is a task worth reviewing using the sociological theory of Max Weber and Erving Goffman. Each decision made to manage my life pulls from Weber’s theory of action and rationality; moreover, each situation

Functional Irrationality Essay

2940 words - 12 pages Functional Irrationality (1) I. Introduction The view that some forms of irrationality may serve a useful purpose is being increasingly entertained, despite the disquiet it elicits. The reason for the disquiet isn't difficult to discern, for if the view were made good it might threaten the unqualified normative primacy that rationality enjoys in the evaluation of thoughts, beliefs, intentions, decisions and actions. In terms of the

Exchange Theory and Communicative Action

1939 words - 8 pages a person action does not have the outcome they wanted, or receives punishment they did not expect the person will become angry. B. a person’s action receives greater reward or less punishment than expected the happier he will be, and the more likely they will want to repeat the action. Finally the final Proposition is Rationality Proposition, when an individual had a choice of between actions; they will choice the one with a higher outcome and

An Analysis of Freakonomics

1282 words - 5 pages whose job is to analyze people’s social behaviors and why they occur. To accomplish the task of analyzing social behaviors, an economist has two advantages which largely distinguish them from other non-economic researchers of society: the assumption of the economic rationality of the decisions of people and verification of facts through the data analysis. Economic rationality is the assumption that people will make decisions that are best for them

Idealism and Materialism as General Approaches to Understanding Society

550 words - 3 pages about his views Max Weber (1864-1920) did too.Max Weber had a different way of looking at the world; he believed that people "viewedthe world" through tradition or rationality. Tradition was followed mainly by pre-industrial societies who believed that following the same beliefs and traditions that theirancestors had followed was the right way to lead their lives. Those in the industrial -capitalist societies took to a rationality approach, which

Rhinoceros purpose passage

636 words - 3 pages In this passage, Ionesco creates a parallel conversation between Berenger and his friend Jean, and the Logician and an Old Gentleman in a bar in which the first two are discussing Berenger’s life and the latter are discussion a syllogism. This passage serves to exemplify how logic can be twisted, absurd and inexplicable beyond human rationality. With this passage, Ionesco goes far beyond the literary realm and into the world, commenting on the

Why Be Critical?

4429 words - 18 pages to be related to the justification of critical thinking. The first issue is whether or not the common conceptualization of critical thinking as a dispositional trait possessed and displayed by the critical thinker is correct. The second issue is whether there is indeed some value to the critical thinker in thinking critically, and if so, what sort of value. The third issue is whether there is a relationship between critical thinking, rationality


1588 words - 6 pages Foundationalism When addressing the method of justification known as foundationalism, we see that the concept of using beliefs to justify the rationality of others is its backbone. In the search for the formation of true belief it offers three major premises; that an infinite regress does not yield justification or rationality, circularity does not yield justification, and that reasons must end with intrinsically credible beliefs. These

Shafer-Landau and Korsgaard

1616 words - 7 pages . While this way of thinking can be argued against and may suffer from the is/ought fallacy it does present a very strait forward argument. Opposing viewpoints can put arguments together but they lack the simplicity that is seen here. He also tackles the arguments of variances in individual’s rationality, actions and beliefs that seek to undermined the realism used by Shafer-Landau as the foundation for his moral rationalism. Shafer-Landau argues

The Strengths and Limitations of a Rational, Strategic Approach to Organisational Change

5116 words - 20 pages and utilise them. 1. A Model-Ideal Conceptualisation of Organisational Goal-Directed-Activity, Rationality, Strategicality, and Organisational Change When planned and goal-directed, fully rational organisational action, like any other ideal form of goal-directed-action, relies on activity generated by the decomposition of a goal-structure, a term that has been defined as follows: "The goal-structure is a

Logic and Moral Dilemmas

3487 words - 14 pages quite real and inevitable in general and in the sphere of education in particular. And we know that moral dilemmas need not result from a conflict of rules conditioned by that rules are incompatible in the proper logical sense. And we know that setting priorities among moral rules (or among classes of "valid moral reasons") for acting will not do the needed job. It is possible of course for a man to hold inconsistent moral beliefs, in the strong

Similar Essays

Criticism Of Morality Essay

997 words - 4 pages Any outcome of rationality is only as good as its assumptions. If 'x' is assumed and 'y' is done leading to outcome 'z', then rational arguments and science can reveal whether it happens to be so. We can say 'y' is right (rationally) if it is consistent with 'x' and does lead to 'z'. If not then it is wrong to do 'y'. So the idea of y being wrong or right depends on the assumptions 'x' and the desired outcome 'z'. The problem with moral science

Witchcraft, Magic And Rationality Essay

2353 words - 9 pages pointed at rationality is not how we use it but rather the apparent self-evident truths that compose our definition of it. Rationality as a function seeks to observe and make judgements on things in an unbiased manner; however our very notions on what observation, judgement and unbiased are, are inevitably tied up in our own opinions. It is impossible to detach prejudice, expectations and cultural upbringing from beliefs and perceptions, even

Rationality Essay

694 words - 3 pages The notion of rationality, which is used to define the capability of proper reasoning or of justifying thoughts, has prevailed in wide range of scholarship, including religion or anthropology, due to the inability to create a universal definition on what is rational. How can one collectively decide what is “irrational” or “rational” in a world with an immense variety of cultural practices and beliefs, when what is accepted in one area may not

Kantian Ethics: The Importance Of One's Duty

1634 words - 7 pages , in any decision, to remain consistent and rational and find it important to consider your role of duty before coming to any decision. Kant is very firm in his beliefs, that every individual should evaluate the decision on their own, based on the rationality and reason of the situation, to consider what their act of duty needs to be performed in the current circumstance, to call the judgment moral. It is logical to understand the