Jamie Buckland

My talk concerns how the extended mind hypothesis can be utilised to split the difference between psychologistic and anti-psychologistic approaches to epistemic reasons for belief. The essential idea being that one’s reasons for belief are constituted by one’s psychological states, some of which literally contain non-psychological items.  From these observations I then consider whether or not the same rationale can be applied to the case of one’s practical reasons for action.  If successful, the result is a unified conception of practical reasoning uniting the explanatory and normative senses of the word “reason”, with strong affinities to Bernard Williams’s infamous internal reasons constraint.