实践推理和命名现实的行为

Fabrizio Macagno, D. Walton
{"title":"实践推理和命名现实的行为","authors":"Fabrizio Macagno, D. Walton","doi":"10.3917/rip.286.0393","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the tradition stemming from Aristotle through Aquinas, rational decision making is seen as a\ncomplex structure of distinct phases in which reasoning and will are interconnected. Intention,\ndeliberation, and decision are regarded as the fundamental steps of the decision-making process, in\nwhich an end is chosen, the means are specified, and a decision to act is made. Based on this\nAristotelian theoretical background, we show how the decision-making process can be modeled as a\nnet of several patterns of reasoning, involving the classification of an action or state of affairs, its\nevaluation, the deliberation about the means to carry it out, and the decision. It is shown how\nargumentation theory can contribute to our understanding of the mechanisms involved by formalizing\nthe steps of reasoning using argumentation schemes, and setting out the value-based criteria underlying\nthe evaluation of an action. Representing each phase of the decision-making process as a separate\nscheme allows one to identify implicit premises and bring the roots of ethical dilemma to light along\nwith the means to resolve them. In particular, we will show the role of framing and classification in\ntriggering value-based reasoning, and how argumentation theory can be used to represent and uproot\nthe grounds of possible manipulations.","PeriodicalId":281397,"journal":{"name":"PRN: Practical Reasoning (Topic)","volume":"292 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Practical Reasoning and the Act of Naming Reality\",\"authors\":\"Fabrizio Macagno, D. Walton\",\"doi\":\"10.3917/rip.286.0393\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In the tradition stemming from Aristotle through Aquinas, rational decision making is seen as a\\ncomplex structure of distinct phases in which reasoning and will are interconnected. Intention,\\ndeliberation, and decision are regarded as the fundamental steps of the decision-making process, in\\nwhich an end is chosen, the means are specified, and a decision to act is made. Based on this\\nAristotelian theoretical background, we show how the decision-making process can be modeled as a\\nnet of several patterns of reasoning, involving the classification of an action or state of affairs, its\\nevaluation, the deliberation about the means to carry it out, and the decision. It is shown how\\nargumentation theory can contribute to our understanding of the mechanisms involved by formalizing\\nthe steps of reasoning using argumentation schemes, and setting out the value-based criteria underlying\\nthe evaluation of an action. Representing each phase of the decision-making process as a separate\\nscheme allows one to identify implicit premises and bring the roots of ethical dilemma to light along\\nwith the means to resolve them. In particular, we will show the role of framing and classification in\\ntriggering value-based reasoning, and how argumentation theory can be used to represent and uproot\\nthe grounds of possible manipulations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":281397,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PRN: Practical Reasoning (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"292 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-01-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PRN: Practical Reasoning (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3917/rip.286.0393\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PRN: Practical Reasoning (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3917/rip.286.0393","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在从亚里士多德到阿奎那的传统中,理性决策被视为一个由不同阶段组成的复杂结构,其中推理和意志是相互联系的。意图、审议和决定被认为是决策过程的基本步骤,在这些步骤中,选择目的,指定手段,做出行动的决定。基于亚里士多德的理论背景,我们展示了决策过程如何被建模为几种推理模式的网络,包括行动或事务状态的分类,其评估,对执行手段的审议以及决策。研究表明,论证理论可以通过形式化使用论证方案的推理步骤,并制定基于价值的行为评估标准,从而有助于我们理解所涉及的机制。将决策过程的每个阶段表示为一个单独的方案,可以识别隐含的前提,并将道德困境的根源与解决这些问题的方法一起揭示出来。特别是,我们将展示框架和分类在触发基于价值的推理中的作用,以及如何使用论证理论来表示和根除可能的操纵依据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Practical Reasoning and the Act of Naming Reality
In the tradition stemming from Aristotle through Aquinas, rational decision making is seen as a complex structure of distinct phases in which reasoning and will are interconnected. Intention, deliberation, and decision are regarded as the fundamental steps of the decision-making process, in which an end is chosen, the means are specified, and a decision to act is made. Based on this Aristotelian theoretical background, we show how the decision-making process can be modeled as a net of several patterns of reasoning, involving the classification of an action or state of affairs, its evaluation, the deliberation about the means to carry it out, and the decision. It is shown how argumentation theory can contribute to our understanding of the mechanisms involved by formalizing the steps of reasoning using argumentation schemes, and setting out the value-based criteria underlying the evaluation of an action. Representing each phase of the decision-making process as a separate scheme allows one to identify implicit premises and bring the roots of ethical dilemma to light along with the means to resolve them. In particular, we will show the role of framing and classification in triggering value-based reasoning, and how argumentation theory can be used to represent and uproot the grounds of possible manipulations.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信