Could Man Be an Irrational Animal? Some Notes on the Epistemology of Rationality

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Abstract

Aristotle thought man was a rational animal. From his time to ours, however, there has been a steady stream of writers who have dissented from this sanguine assessment. Recently, however, there have been rumblings of a reaction brewing-a resurgence of Aristotelian optimism. Those defending the sullied name of human reason have been philosophers, and their weapons have been conceptual analysis and epistemological argument. The central thrust of their defense is the claim that empirical evidence could not possibly support the conclusion that people are systematically irrational. And thus the experiments which allegedly show that they are must be either flawed or misinterpreted. This chapter takes a critical look at these philosophical defenses of rationality. The central thesis is that the philosophical arguments aimed at showing irrationality cannot be experimentally demonstrated are mistaken. Before considering these arguments, this chapter sets out a few illustrations of the sort of empirical studies which allegedly show that people depart from normative standards of rationality in systematic ways.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationCollected Papers, Volume 2
Subtitle of host publicationKnowledge, Rationality, and Morality, 1978-2010
PublisherOxford University Press
ISBN (Electronic)9780199949823
ISBN (Print)9780199733477
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 20 2012

Fingerprint

Epistemology
Rationality
Animals
Brewing
Writer
Empirical Study
Aristotelian
Resurgence
Names
Philosophical Arguments
Philosopher
Aristotle
Experiment
Empirical Evidence
Epistemological
Weapons
Conceptual Analysis
Optimism
Irrationality

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Arts and Humanities(all)

Keywords

  • Aristotle
  • Human reason
  • Irrationality
  • Philosophical defense
  • Rationality

Cite this

Stich, S. (2012). Could Man Be an Irrational Animal? Some Notes on the Epistemology of Rationality. In Collected Papers, Volume 2: Knowledge, Rationality, and Morality, 1978-2010 Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199733477.003.0003
Stich, Stephen. / Could Man Be an Irrational Animal? Some Notes on the Epistemology of Rationality. Collected Papers, Volume 2: Knowledge, Rationality, and Morality, 1978-2010. Oxford University Press, 2012.
@inbook{d478873a1a8f4dd3915a8dc80ecaf509,
title = "Could Man Be an Irrational Animal?: Some Notes on the Epistemology of Rationality",
abstract = "Aristotle thought man was a rational animal. From his time to ours, however, there has been a steady stream of writers who have dissented from this sanguine assessment. Recently, however, there have been rumblings of a reaction brewing-a resurgence of Aristotelian optimism. Those defending the sullied name of human reason have been philosophers, and their weapons have been conceptual analysis and epistemological argument. The central thrust of their defense is the claim that empirical evidence could not possibly support the conclusion that people are systematically irrational. And thus the experiments which allegedly show that they are must be either flawed or misinterpreted. This chapter takes a critical look at these philosophical defenses of rationality. The central thesis is that the philosophical arguments aimed at showing irrationality cannot be experimentally demonstrated are mistaken. Before considering these arguments, this chapter sets out a few illustrations of the sort of empirical studies which allegedly show that people depart from normative standards of rationality in systematic ways.",
keywords = "Aristotle, Human reason, Irrationality, Philosophical defense, Rationality",
author = "Stephen Stich",
year = "2012",
month = "9",
day = "20",
doi = "10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199733477.003.0003",
language = "English (US)",
isbn = "9780199733477",
booktitle = "Collected Papers, Volume 2",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
address = "United Kingdom",

}

Stich, S 2012, Could Man Be an Irrational Animal? Some Notes on the Epistemology of Rationality. in Collected Papers, Volume 2: Knowledge, Rationality, and Morality, 1978-2010. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199733477.003.0003

Could Man Be an Irrational Animal? Some Notes on the Epistemology of Rationality. / Stich, Stephen.

Collected Papers, Volume 2: Knowledge, Rationality, and Morality, 1978-2010. Oxford University Press, 2012.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

TY - CHAP

T1 - Could Man Be an Irrational Animal?

T2 - Some Notes on the Epistemology of Rationality

AU - Stich, Stephen

PY - 2012/9/20

Y1 - 2012/9/20

N2 - Aristotle thought man was a rational animal. From his time to ours, however, there has been a steady stream of writers who have dissented from this sanguine assessment. Recently, however, there have been rumblings of a reaction brewing-a resurgence of Aristotelian optimism. Those defending the sullied name of human reason have been philosophers, and their weapons have been conceptual analysis and epistemological argument. The central thrust of their defense is the claim that empirical evidence could not possibly support the conclusion that people are systematically irrational. And thus the experiments which allegedly show that they are must be either flawed or misinterpreted. This chapter takes a critical look at these philosophical defenses of rationality. The central thesis is that the philosophical arguments aimed at showing irrationality cannot be experimentally demonstrated are mistaken. Before considering these arguments, this chapter sets out a few illustrations of the sort of empirical studies which allegedly show that people depart from normative standards of rationality in systematic ways.

AB - Aristotle thought man was a rational animal. From his time to ours, however, there has been a steady stream of writers who have dissented from this sanguine assessment. Recently, however, there have been rumblings of a reaction brewing-a resurgence of Aristotelian optimism. Those defending the sullied name of human reason have been philosophers, and their weapons have been conceptual analysis and epistemological argument. The central thrust of their defense is the claim that empirical evidence could not possibly support the conclusion that people are systematically irrational. And thus the experiments which allegedly show that they are must be either flawed or misinterpreted. This chapter takes a critical look at these philosophical defenses of rationality. The central thesis is that the philosophical arguments aimed at showing irrationality cannot be experimentally demonstrated are mistaken. Before considering these arguments, this chapter sets out a few illustrations of the sort of empirical studies which allegedly show that people depart from normative standards of rationality in systematic ways.

KW - Aristotle

KW - Human reason

KW - Irrationality

KW - Philosophical defense

KW - Rationality

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84921738353&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84921738353&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199733477.003.0003

DO - 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199733477.003.0003

M3 - Chapter

AN - SCOPUS:84921738353

SN - 9780199733477

BT - Collected Papers, Volume 2

PB - Oxford University Press

ER -

Stich S. Could Man Be an Irrational Animal? Some Notes on the Epistemology of Rationality. In Collected Papers, Volume 2: Knowledge, Rationality, and Morality, 1978-2010. Oxford University Press. 2012 https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199733477.003.0003