Promising Against the Evidence #2 - Ethics | PHILOSOPHY

TL;DR

Explores the ethics of promising against evidence with four flawed responses.

Transcript

hi I'm Betty some Irish and they go by Barry I'm a philosophy professor at Brandeis University today I'm going to continue talking about the problem of promising against the evidence I'll talk about four responses to the problem that I think have some apparent plausibility but that don't really work but let me first remind you of the problem the pr... Read More

Key Insights

• Promising against evidence raises ethical questions about sincerity and rationality, particularly in commitments like lifelong partnerships.
• The first response suggests promising to try, but this is inadequate as it implies a lack of commitment to trying one's hardest.
• Promising to try is valid when external factors may prevent fulfillment, but not when actions are solely within personal control.
• The second response claims intentions, not beliefs, are needed for sincere promises, but intentions inherently involve beliefs about future actions.
• The third response posits that decisions provide practical knowledge, but evidence of probable failure undermines this knowledge.
• Evidential constraints on promising suggest responsible promises require high confidence in fulfillment, challenging common commitments like wedding vows.
• Decisions to act should be based on values and obligations, not solely on evidence or predictions of success.
• An evidentialist approach limits action by requiring predictive confidence, ignoring the importance of resolute decision-making and resisting temptation.

Questions & Answers

Q: Why is promising against evidence considered problematic?

Promising against evidence is problematic because it questions the sincerity and rationality of the promise. If evidence suggests a high likelihood of not fulfilling the promise, making such a promise can be seen as insincere. Additionally, believing in the promise despite contrary evidence may be irrational, leading to ethical concerns.

Q: What is the issue with promising to try, according to the video?

Promising to try is problematic because it implies a lack of full commitment to the action. It suggests that the promisor is not fully prepared to exert their best effort, which undermines the sincerity of the promise. This approach is only valid when external factors might prevent fulfillment, not when actions are within personal control.

Q: How does the video critique the response involving intentions?

The video critiques the response focusing on intentions by arguing that intentions inherently involve beliefs about future actions. Simply intending to do something without believing in its success is insufficient for sincere promises. Intentions shape our outlook on future actions, making it difficult to separate them from beliefs.

Q: What is the concept of practical knowledge in decision-making?

Practical knowledge in decision-making refers to the idea that deciding to do something provides a form of knowledge about one's future actions. However, the video argues that evidence suggesting likely failure undermines this knowledge. Practical knowledge cannot stand when contrary evidence acts as a defeater, challenging its reliability.

Q: Why does the evidential constraint on promising seem reasonable yet flawed?

The evidential constraint on promising appears reasonable because it demands high confidence in fulfilling promises. However, it is flawed as it restricts decision-making to predictive certainty, neglecting the importance of values, obligations, and resolute action. It overlooks the role of personal commitment in shaping future actions.

Q: How does the video suggest we approach promises differently?

The video suggests approaching promises by balancing evidence with personal values and obligations. Instead of relying solely on predictive certainty, decisions should consider what is important to the individual, allowing for resolute action and commitment even in the face of uncertain outcomes. This approach emphasizes personal responsibility and integrity.

Q: What role do values play in decision-making according to the video?

Values play a crucial role in decision-making by guiding actions beyond mere evidence or predictions of success. They help individuals decide what is worth committing to, enabling them to make promises based on personal importance and ethical considerations. Values provide a foundation for resolute decisions, even when outcomes are uncertain.

Q: Why is resolute decision-making important in the context of promises?

Resolute decision-making is important because it allows individuals to commit to actions despite uncertain outcomes. It emphasizes the importance of personal commitment and the ability to resist temptation, focusing on what is valued and ethically significant. This approach supports integrity and sincerity in promises, balancing evidence with personal convictions.

Summary & Key Takeaways

• The video discusses the ethical dilemma of making promises against evidence, focusing on whether such promises can be made sincerely and rationally. It presents four responses to this problem, each with inherent flaws, and critiques them to highlight the complexity of ethical decision-making.

• The first response, promising to try, is dismissed as it indicates a lack of full commitment. The second response, focusing on intentions, fails because intentions are closely tied to beliefs about future success. The third response, involving practical knowledge from decisions, is weakened by contrary evidence.

• The fourth response, advocating evidential constraints on promising, is criticized for limiting decisiveness and ignoring the role of values in decision-making. The video argues for a different approach to promises, emphasizing the need to balance evidence with personal values and commitments.