| OCR Text |
Show Anonymous praise from the Referees of Cambridge and Oxford University Presses for RATIONALITY AND THE STRUCTURE OF THE SELF, VOLUME I: THE HUMEAN CONCEPTIONS [T]his is a magnificent, deep, thorough, and ground-breaking (and groundclearing) work. It takes on our (i.e., the Anglo-American) ruling philosophical and social scientific view of the self and action - focusing on the self as rational actor and on (our accounts and understandings of) the grounds and causes of decision, especially evaluable decision. To give it three names: this is the belief-desire, the Humean (from David Hume), and the instrumental account of action and the self. One of Piper's arguments shows how these are three names of the same view. Far more significantly, she shows how very pervasive this view is: that it is held not only by those we know (and celebrate for) for holding and defending this view, e.g., utilitarians of various sorts, but also by many who have been taken as severe critics, offering alternative views. Among these last, she argues, are Nagel and, of all people, Rawls. To show this is not only "historically" important, showing what is or is not held by major philosophers, but also philosophically important, show how seductive that view is, how even those who set out to criticize it (and have been taken by many to show it mistaken) fall back into it. Piper, it must be emphasized, does not show only that there is this falling back, but why there is. These last points are strong and important. Of great importance, also - perhaps of more lasting importance - are Piper's very powerful arguments showing the ineliminable and deep defects of that view. She argues powerfully that the belief-desire, Humean, instrumentalist self and action are essentially arbitrary, even philosophically empty. … In brief, our ruling view is defective, even rotten, root and branch. Powerful and significant claims. Piper does not merely claim this, she argues extensively, thoroughly and powerfully for them. … … Her arguments are … deep and important - and they are compelling. It will be difficult, if not impossible, to maintain that view without answering Piper. The extensiveness (almost the relentlessness) of her arguments - … will (should) prevent us from thinking that she has, at most, identified localized problems that can be solved or least evaded by simple or standard moves. … I have already suggested that I think Piper is successful. I leave aside the question of whether she is right, beyond reply. Philosophers have replies to just about everybody. … [s]he is successful in showing the serious need to consider abandoning that ruling view - and embracing another one. This latter task - embracing another one, showing what it is, defending it, and so on - is the promised concern of the second volume of this work, focusing on Kant and Kantian approaches to the self and action. I have read early versions of it and have found it as powerful as the first volume. … To |
