[lit-ideas] Re: When you're hot you're hot, when you're not ...

  • From: Phil Enns <phil.enns@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2009 18:56:08 +0700

Eric wrote:

"What is refuted is that decisions are made purely on rational
grounds; if that were so, every decision would be paralyzing, Oblomov
meets Woody Allen."

Again, if rational activity is the evaluation of desires and the means
for satisfying one's preferred desires, then it isn't clear to me what
has been refuted.  Eric's brain-injured subjects are not engaged in
rational activity since there is no or little evaluation of what is to
be preferred.

What I am curious about is how the researchers, or Eric, might
understand the implications of their 'refutation' for the research
project itself.  Put differently, given the 'refutation', what is the
significance of the study, beyond being the expression of the opinions
of the authors?


Sincerely,

Phil Enns
Yogyakarta, Indonesia
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. lit-ideas
  3. Archive
  4. 09-2009