Rationality in Action

Key Takeaways

1. The Gap: Understanding the Conscious Experience of Free Will

The gap is that feature of the consciousness of voluntary actions, whereby the actions are experienced as not having sufficient psychological causal conditions to determine them.

The Gap in Action. The gap refers to the conscious experience of freedom in decision-making and action. It manifests in three key areas:

1. Between deliberation and decision
2. Between decision and action
3. In extended actions, between initiation and completion

This experience of freedom is fundamental to our understanding of rationality and responsibility. Without the gap, we would perceive our actions as predetermined, eliminating the possibility of rational assessment or moral accountability.

Implications of the Gap. The existence of the gap challenges deterministic models of human behavior and has profound implications for:

• Moral responsibility
• Legal systems
• Theories of rational decision-making
• Our understanding of human agency and autonomy

While the gap is psychologically real, its neurobiological reality remains a subject of debate and ongoing research.

2. Desire-Independent Reasons for Action: Beyond the Classical Model

The single most remarkable capacity of human rationality, and the single way in which it differs most from ape rationality, is the capacity to create and to act on desire-independent reasons for action.

Expanding Rationality. The Classical Model of rationality, which posits that all actions are ultimately motivated by desires, is insufficient to explain human behavior. Humans can create and act upon reasons that are independent of their immediate desires, such as obligations, commitments, and long-term goals.

Creating Commitments. Desire-independent reasons are often created through language and social institutions. For example:

• Making a promise creates an obligation
• Signing a contract establishes commitments
• Social roles (e.g., being a parent) generate responsibilities

These reasons can motivate action even when they conflict with immediate desires, demonstrating a level of rationality that goes beyond simple means-ends reasoning.

3. The Self as a Rational Agent: Overcoming Humean Skepticism

There is no way to explain what a statement is without explaining that the commitment to truth is internal to statement making.

The Irreducible Self. Contrary to Hume's bundle theory of the self, rational agency requires a concept of an enduring, conscious self that can make decisions and be held responsible for its actions. This self is not merely a collection of experiences but an entity capable of:

• Engaging in deliberation
• Making decisions
• Carrying out actions
• Assuming responsibility over time

Implications for Rationality. The existence of an irreducible self is crucial for understanding:

• How we can create and act on desire-independent reasons
• The nature of moral responsibility
• The coherence of long-term planning and commitment
• The possibility of genuine rational deliberation

4. Language and Strong Altruism: Universal Commitments in Rationality

The generality of language, given certain commonsense assumptions about my own self-interests, will generate strong altruism.

Language and Universality. The structure of language contains inherent commitments to universality. When we make assertions or claims, we implicitly commit to their general applicability, not just to ourselves but to all relevantly similar cases.

From Egoism to Altruism. This universality in language provides a logical basis for strong altruism:

1. If I claim I have a reason for action based on my needs or interests
2. I implicitly commit to recognizing similar reasons for others in similar situations
3. This recognition forms the basis of rational altruism

This argument shows how rational self-interest, combined with the universal nature of linguistic commitments, can generate altruistic reasons for action without requiring additional moral premises.

5. Weakness of Will: A Common and Natural Form of Irrationality

Akrasia in rational beings is as common as wine in France.

Understanding Akrasia. Weakness of will, or akrasia, is not a rare or mysterious phenomenon but a common feature of human rationality. It occurs when an agent acts against their better judgment, choosing a course of action they believe to be inferior.

The Gap and Akrasia. The possibility of weakness of will is a direct consequence of the gap in human decision-making:

• We always have multiple options available
• Even after deliberation, we must still choose to act
• This choice is not determined by our prior reasoning

Akrasia demonstrates that:

• Rational deliberation does not causally necessitate action
• Human decision-making involves genuine choice, even in the face of strong reasons

6. The Limits of Deductive Logic in Practical Reasoning

As near as I can tell, the search for a formal deductive logical structure of practical reason is misguided.

Practical vs. Theoretical Reason. While theoretical reasoning (about what to believe) can often be modeled using deductive logic, practical reasoning (about what to do) resists such formalization. This is due to fundamental differences between beliefs and desires:

1. Consistency: We can rationally hold inconsistent desires but not inconsistent beliefs
2. Closure: Beliefs are closed under logical implication, but desires are not

Implications for Decision Theory. The lack of a deductive logic for practical reason challenges:

• Traditional decision theory models
• Attempts to formalize rational choice
• The idea that practical reasoning can be reduced to a set of rules or algorithms

Instead, practical reasoning often involves:

• Adjudicating between conflicting desires and reasons
• Dealing with inconsistent obligations and commitments
• Making choices in the absence of logically compelling conclusions

7. Consciousness and Free Will: Reconciling Neuroscience with Human Experience

Consciousness is a real biological phenomenon. It consists of inner, qualitative, subjective, unified states of sentience, awareness, thoughts, and feelings.

Biological Consciousness. Consciousness is a higher-level feature of the brain, caused by neuronal processes but irreducible to them. Key aspects of consciousness include:

• Qualitativeness: There's something it feels like to be in conscious states
• Subjectivity: Conscious experiences exist only for a subject
• Unity: Conscious states form a unified field of experience

Free Will and Neuroscience. The challenge is to reconcile our conscious experience of free will with our understanding of the brain as a physical system:

• The gap in conscious decision-making suggests genuine freedom
• Yet, all mental phenomena are ultimately based in brain processes

Possible approaches to this problem include:

1. The Building Block Approach: Studying individual conscious experiences
2. The Unified Field Approach: Investigating the difference between conscious and unconscious brain states

The resolution of this tension remains one of the central challenges in understanding human rationality and agency.

Last updated: August 7, 2024

Report Issue