Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T04:16:38.927Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rationalization in the pejorative sense: Cushman's account overlooks the scope and costs of rationalization

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 April 2020

Jonathan Ellis Open the ORCID record for Jonathan Ellis [Opens in a new window]  and
Eric Schwitzgebel
Jonathan Ellis
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, University of California at Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, CA95064jellis@ucsc.edujonathanellis.ucsc.edu/
Eric Schwitzgebel
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, University of California at Riverside, Riverside, CA92521-0201. eschwitz@ucr.edufaculty.ucr.edu/~eschwitz
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

According to Cushman, rationalization occurs when a person has performed an action and then concocts beliefs and desires that would have made it rational. We argue that this isn't the paradigmatic form of rationalization. Consequently, Cushman's explanation of the function and usefulness of rationalization is less broad-reaching than he intends. Cushman's account also obscures some of rationalization's pernicious consequences.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 43 , 2020 , e35
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bortolotti, L. (2015) The epistemic innocence of motivated delusions. Consciousness and Cognition 33:490–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jones, E. (1908) Rationalisation in every-day life. The Journal of Abnormal Psychology 3(3):161–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kunda, Z. (1990) The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin 108(3):480–98.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schwitzgebel, E. & Ellis, J. (2017) Rationalization in moral and philosophical thought. In: Current issues in thinking and reasoning. Moral inferences, ed. Bonnefon, J.-F. & Trémolière, B., pp. 170–90. Routledge/Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar