| OCR Text |
Show Rationality and the Structure of the Self, Volume I: The Humean Conception 35 Rationalism subverts the enterprise of Socratic metaethics in practice while relying on it in theory, the Humean conception of the self subverts Socratic metaethics in theory while relying on it in practice. If the Humean conception of the self is right, then the practice of philosophy is little more than an übermenschliches power game. But if that conception is wrong or incomplete, then Humeans are ignoring the larger arena in which these little games are played out. 7.2. Volume I: The Humean Conception Essentially, Volume I of this project complains about other people's views, including, of course, Hume's own. It nevertheless expresses Achtung for these views, and for the thought and hard work that went into them, by treating each in depth rather than in passing. Its critical arguments are intended to motivate us to rethink our commitment to the prevailing Humean paradigm, first by pointing out defects in its twentieth century formulation and use in metaethical justification; and second, by scrutinizing the extent to which we may validly appeal to the authority of history and tradition in support of that formulation. I try on the one hand to acknowledge the technical sophistication and practical power of the Humean conception, and on the other to call attention to certain formal and theoretical limitations that I believe require the detailed treatment that I try to give them. I suggest that this conception is in fact a special case of an alternative, transpersonal conception of the role of reason - the Kantian conception that I elaborate in detail in Volume II - that is broader in scope, more firmly ensconced in the traditional canon, and more radical in its implications for practice. 7.2.1. The Two Models Taken together, the belief-desire model of motivation and the utilitymaximizing model of rationality constitute the Humean conception of the self as driven by desire to maximize the satisfaction of desire under all circumstances. I begin by considering separately each of the two models that comprise the Humean conception: first the belief-desire model of motivation in Chapter II, then the utility-maximizing model of rationality in Chapters III and IV. Here my focus is on the internal, structural defects of these models themselves, irrespective of their deployment in any particular moral theory. I base my formulation of the belief-desire model on the classic discussions of Brandt and Kim, Goldman, and Lewis; revise and refine it in light of certain problems that arise within that classical formulation; and elaborate some of the further problems, both structural and metaethical, that even that sympathetic reformulation cannot avoid. In Chapters III and IV I give the same detailed attention to the utility-maximizing model of rationality, and argue in Chapter IV that even the sophisticated mid-century reformulations and formal elaborations of this model undertaken by Von Neumann© Adrian Piper Research Archive Foundation Berlin |
