Argumentation theorists have identified two kinds of practical reasoning: instrumental practical reasoning that does not explicitly take values into account,  and value-based practical reasoning. The pronoun I represents an autonomous agent.
- Account Options.
- reasoning, practical - Dictionary of Philosophy of Mind!
- Membrane protein - Expression, purification and characterization?
- Navigation menu?
- Practical Reasoning About Final Ends.
It can be seen from CQ5 that argumentation from consequences is closely related to the scheme for practical reasoning. It has often been disputed in philosophy whether practical reasoning is purely instrumental or whether it needs to be based on values. Argument from values is combined with practical reasoning in the type of argumentation called value-based practical reasoning. Practical reasoning is used in arguments, but also in explanations used to draw conclusions about an agent's goals, motives or intentions, based on reports of what the agent said or did.
Practical reasoning is centrally important in artificial intelligence, and also vitally important in many other fields such as law, medicine and engineering. It has been known as a distinctive type of argumentation as far back as Aristotle.
Happiness, Eudaimonia, and Practical Reasoning
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Argumentation Schemes.
- See a Problem?.
- Hospital-Based Health Technology Assessment: The Next Frontier for Health Technology Assessment.
- Recollections and Reflections.
- Review. Practical reasoning about final ends. Henry Richardson | Mind | Oxford Academic;
New York: Cambridge University Press. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems. Informal Logic.
Other editions. Enlarge cover. Error rating book. Refresh and try again.
Open Preview See a Problem? Details if other :.
Thanks for telling us about the problem. Return to Book Page. How should we reason about what we do? The answer offered by most recent philosophy, as well as such disciplines as decision theory, welfare economics, and political science, is that we should select efficient means to our ends.
However, if we ask how we should decide which ends or goals to aim at, these standard theoretical approaches are silent.
- 3 editions of this work.
- Account Options!
- About This Item.
Henry Richardson argues t How should we reason about what we do? Henry Richardson argues that we can determine our ends rationally. He constructs a rich and original theory of how we can reason about what to seek for its own sake as a final goal. Richardson defuses the counterarguments for the limits of rational deliberation, and develops interesting ideas about how his model might be extended to interpersonal deliberation of ends, taking him to the borders of political theory.
Get A Copy. Paperback , pages. More Details Second, this final end is eudaimonia—a good life for the one living it, i.
Practical Reasoning about Final Ends - Henry S. Richardson - Google Books
This chapter explores these two ideas. Then it asks whether the sort of good that happiness is could also be the final end for deliberation, focusing on questions about other-regarding ends, self-sacrifice, and moral obligations. Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter. Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.
Refine your editions:
To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us. All Rights Reserved. OSO version 0.