Rational Choice, Deliberation, and Determinism

Abstract

<p>In this thesis I attempt to show that, contrary to the arguments offered by Carl Ginet and Richard Taylor, there is nothing in the concepts of rational choice and deliberation which would make them logically inconsistent with determinism. To this end, I begin by offering my own analyses, of these and related concepts. Except for the use of criteria and standards in place of wants and desires, my analysis of rational choice is quite similar to the standard conception. In chapter three I attempt to refute Hume's theory of causation and offer my own alternative, the principle of causal entailment. In chapter four, I attempt to point out some of the implications of this view of causation for determinism in human affairs. In chapter five, I attempt to refute the arguments offered by Ginet and Taylor.</p>