Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Normative reasons are what people appeal to when making arguments about what people should do or believe. For example, that a doctor's patient is grimacing is a reason to believe the patient is in pain. That the patient is in pain is a reason for the doctor to do things to alleviate the pain. Explanatory reasons are explanations of why things ...
It is an attempt to find reasons for behaviors, especially one's own. [2] Rationalizations are used to defend against feelings of guilt, maintain self-respect, and protect oneself from criticism. Rationalization happens in two steps: A decision, action, judgement is made for a given reason, or no (known) reason at all.
The argument from reason is a transcendental argument against metaphysical naturalism and for the existence of God (or at least a supernatural being that is the source of human reason). The best-known defender of the argument is C. S. Lewis .
The rule of reason is a legal doctrine used to interpret the Sherman Antitrust Act, one of the cornerstones of United States antitrust law.While some actions like price-fixing are considered illegal per se, other actions, such as possession of a monopoly, must be analyzed under the rule of reason and are only considered illegal when their effect is to unreasonably restrain trade.
Reason is the capacity of consciously applying logic by drawing valid conclusions from new or existing information, with the aim of seeking the truth. [1] It is associated with such characteristically human activities as philosophy, religion, science, language, mathematics, and art, and is normally considered to be a distinguishing ability possessed by humans.
The purpose of arguments is to convince a person that something is the case by providing reasons for this belief. [25] [26] Many arguments in natural language do not explicitly state all the premises. Instead, the premises are often implicitly assumed, especially if they seem obvious and belong to common sense.
Plus, there are many talented players Clark is up against for the guard position. Clark would also have been by some distance the youngest and most inexperienced player on the team.
So this reason makes it rational for the agent to eat the food. [15] An important aspect of this interpretation is that it is not sufficient to merely act accidentally in accordance with reasons. Instead, responding to reasons implies that one acts intentionally because of these reasons. [2] Some theorists understand reasons as external facts.