#practical reasoning

[omegaphilosophia]

The Philosophy of Behavior

The philosophy of behavior, also known as the philosophy of action, is a branch of philosophy that examines the nature, causes, and significance of human and animal behavior. It seeks to understand the underlying principles that govern actions and the relationship between behavior, intentionality, and agency. Key concepts and theories in the philosophy of behavior include:

Intentionality: Intentionality refers to the directedness or purposefulness of mental states and actions. Philosophers explore how intentions influence behavior and the role of intentionality in understanding the meaning and rationality of actions.

Free Will: The question of free will is central to the philosophy of behavior. Philosophers debate whether individuals have the capacity to choose and control their actions freely, or if behavior is determined by factors beyond conscious control, such as genetics, environment, or unconscious processes.

Agency: Agency refers to the capacity of individuals to act independently and make choices. Philosophers examine the conditions under which agents can be held responsible for their actions, the relationship between freedom and responsibility, and the constraints on agency imposed by social, cultural, and psychological factors.

Motivation: Motivation plays a crucial role in behavior, influencing the reasons why individuals act in particular ways. Philosophers analyze the nature of motivation, including desires, beliefs, emotions, and values, and how these factors shape behavior and decision-making.

Action Theory: Action theory explores the nature of actions, their causal mechanisms, and the criteria for distinguishing between intentional and unintentional actions. Philosophers investigate the structure of actions, the role of mental states in guiding behavior, and the relationship between actions, outcomes, and consequences.

Practical Reasoning: Practical reasoning involves the process of deliberation and decision-making in everyday life. Philosophers examine how individuals reason about actions, weigh competing values and considerations, and make choices based on practical concerns and ethical principles.

Behaviorism: Behaviorism is a psychological approach that emphasizes observable behavior and external stimuli as the primary determinants of behavior. Philosophers discuss the implications of behaviorism for understanding human agency, consciousness, and the mind-body relationship.

Ethical Behavior: Ethics considers the moral dimensions of behavior, including questions of right and wrong, good and bad, and the principles that guide ethical conduct. Philosophers explore ethical theories and principles, moral reasoning, and the application of ethical norms to individual and collective behavior.

The philosophy of behavior addresses fundamental questions about human nature, consciousness, and the factors that influence how individuals act and interact in the world.

[dlittle30]

Deficiencies in practical rationality in organizations Suppose we are willing to take seriously the idea that organizations possess a kind of intentionally -- beliefs, goals, and purposive actions -- and suppose that we believe that the microfoundations of these quasi-intentional states depend on the workings of individual purposive actors within specific sets of relations, incentives, and practices.

[wifiwife]

The ability to form an object we desire to achieve through action.

The ability to form a belief about how certain actions will or will not achieve the objects of our desires.

The ability to act on our desires and our belief so that our actions form the “conclusion” of a valid practical syllogism.

— Capacity for practical reasoning described by M Moore in ‘Causation and the Excuses’ (1985)

[ennuigirlfriend]

The ability to form an object we desire to achieve through action.

The ability to form a belief about how certain actions will or will not achieve the objects of our desires.

The ability to act on our desires and our belief so that our actions form the “conclusion” of a valid practical syllogism.

— Capacity for practical reasoning described by M Moore in ‘Causation and the Excuses’ (1985)

[resting-on-the-eventide]

My boyfriend and I have invested in new glasses bc 1. It's practical when you're eyesight is terrible and 2. Glasses are cute, but mostly 3. Bc we need to be prepared fir when the zombie apocalypse occurs bc contacts won't last forever.

[sinjones]

Thoughts on Practical Reasoning...

Thoughts on Practical Reasoning…

  In the simplest of terms, Practical Reasoning is a method by way a person determines how to act by weighing the merits of relative actions.  The practicality of the method is contemplated by first a set of questions:

  If the action has yet to be performed, what is the best method to carry it out?

What should be done, vs. what one desires to do?

What is the value in doing what one wants to do vs. what one should do?

What is the quantitate value of the action?

What considerations have been made to discern if an alternate set of reasons can be determined as well as valued?

Then first-person determinations:

Finding out for ourselves, either individually or collectively

Examination of Intention vs. belief

Couching reasons in evaluative terms, i.e. what would be the most beneficial to do vs. what makes practical sense.

To put it into perspective, here is a common Practical Reasoning exercise:

  If you put a coin in an empty bottle and insert a cork into the neck of the bottle, how could you remove the coin without taking the cork out or breaking the bottle?

  Common-sense would tell you that the most practical thing to do is to simply push the cork inside the bottle thereby freeing the opening to empty out the coin.    

Common sense is prudent judgment based on your perception of the situation; it doesn’t necessarily involve facts or proven theory.   It may very well be rooted in personal belief; such is the case when one replaces a moral code with a code of Honor.

We lend providence to consensus opinion and peer groups by putting ourselves under rational pressure that brings our beliefs and intentions into compliance. A set of standards of consistency and coherence within a given structure can certainly bring a god to his knees.   In the case of moral laws, for example, it may be considered immoral to break the rules. People find comfort in acceptance and tend to affirm themselves by receiving admiration from others.   In the cases of those that value peer-evaluation, they may examine a relative action by placing themselves in a peer’s shoes and then go on to mimic rather than test what they’re truly made of.

In the case of the corked bottle, context is everything.  Maybe it’s unreasonable to break the rules for immediate gratification but the return serves a higher purpose.

Practical reasoning can often be boiled down to moral reasoning:  A set of demands.  In evaluative terms, when one internalizes weighing merits, it often consists of an internal moral dilemma.  What would the Inquisitor think of my action?  Would I be considered less than reasonable if I just do what I want?  Is my reasoning flawed by the consensus opinion?    Would my peers reject me?  Would my actions be abhorrent to upholding a standard?

At best Ethical Consequentialism and at worst: Slave Morality.

Consider for a moment the norms of what is practical and impractical, valuable and invaluable as well as reasonable and unreasonable.    The character traits you hold are the driving force to take action.  While some may spend a great deal of time evaluating the best course of action to take, others have already carried out the Alexandrian Solution; coin in hand.

Autonomy is Prime.  If I am to govern myself, I’m not going to spend a lot of time waxing philosophical.  My past actions don’t dictate my future nor do they command my person as a Master does a Slave.    There will be times when I take the less practical approach to endure the struggle and at others, the struggle doesn’t serve me at all. 

I’ll not live my life as a martyr constantly making sacrifice on principal alone.  Having reasons is often in flux with being reasonable.  There’s a pay-off to being unreasonable.  Sometimes a good thing isn’t good enough, a failure is just a failed imagination and being over-confident in my abilities can place me in a situation where I’m putting them to test.  Practical reasoning is damned!