A Horty-style Reflection On The Debate About The Concept Of Reasons

There are two main problems with the concept of reasons,one is the argument about what the reasons is and the other is the interpretation of the criterion of justification.Some scholars believe that the reasons for action is desire and belief,while others believe that the reasons for action is fact.What the actor takes action based on is the psychological factor of the subject,while the normative requirement of action is generally an objective fact.This gives rise to the argument between the theory of reasons from the inside and the theory of reasons from the outside.The debate between these two viewpoints has not been concluded yet.How to view the argument between them and make a reasonable explanation for the reasons is the key to solve the dispute.In addition,the criterion of reasons balancing mainly refers to how to explain the ordering and balancing of multiple reasons by the subject when the action or belief of the subject has multiple reasons.Although there are some relevant theories about the balance of reasons in the academic circle,due to the defects of these theories,there is no complete interpretation of the balance of reasons.Therefore,based on the above two questions,this paper attempts to make a Horty-style solution to these two questions through the analysis of Horty's reasons theory.This paper studies the concept of reasons,and the main work is as follows:First of all,this paper introduces the specific content of the philosophical argument of the concept of reasons in detail.To this end,this paper sorts out the analysis and definition of the concept of reasons of action made by Davidson and other philosophers.This paper analyzes the main arguments between the theory of interior and the theory of exterior caused by the concept of reasons.This paper analyzes the trade-off mechanism proposed by Hitchcock and Gervil respectively and finds the core points of the trade-off problem.Whether reason is a fact or a psychological factor and how to explain the trade-off mechanism between reasons are two major issues in the debate over the concept of reason.They are also two issues that this paper will focus on.Then,this article has carried on the detailed elaboration to the Horty's reason theory.Horty's description of the concept of reasons on the basis of default logic can help us to answer the three questions more clearly,that is,what is "reasons",what is the condition to become a reasons and how to balance between reasons.This paper analyzes and summarizes Horty's view of reasons on the basis of his logic of reason.In addition,as an example,this paper also briefly introduces how Horty's theory of reason deals with the concept of reason in the moral field and the legal field.In the end,this paper makes an in-depth analysis of the characteristics of the concept of reason based on Horty's theory of reason,and gives a response to its philosophical arguments and problems.Based on Horty's logical description of reasons,this paper discusses the argument between internalism and externalism and argues that reasons should be limited to facts rather than psychological states.In addition,this paper also points out the solution to the problem of the balance of reasons by using the priority relation between the default(rules)described by Horty.By sorting out the core of the argument between the theory of internal and the theory of external,this paper tries to make a new explanation of the argument of the concept of reason through Horty's theory of reasons,so as to eliminate the contradiction between the two theories.Think of the reasons as the premise of a valid default inference.And try to use default logic as a basic reasoning tool to deal with the conflicting problems between reasons.