Abstract
There are arguments which purport to rebut psychological determinism by appealing to its alleged incompatibility with rationality. I argue that they all fail. Against Davidson, I argue that rationality does not preclude the existence of psychological laws. Against Popper, I argue that rationality is compatible with the possibility of predicting human actions. Against Schlesinger, I claim that Newcomb's problem cannot be invoked to show that human actions are unpredictable. Having vindicated the possibility of a rationally-based theory of action, I consider the form it might take.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 67-79 |
Number of pages | 13 |
Journal | Erkenntnis |
Volume | 43 |
Issue number | 1 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - Jul 1995 |