This chapter looks in detail at normative truths. It first considers disagreements; when we disagree with other people, we cannot rationally keep our beliefs unless we can justifiably assume that there is some asymmetry between us and these other people, making us more likely to be right. In Plato's Republic, Socrates asks: How should we live? Socrates is asking which kind of life is intrinsically best, by being the life that we have most reason to want to live. Bernard Williams denies that some ways of living could be, in this sense, intrinsically better than others. Rather than asking Socrates's question, Williams claims that we should ask ‘What do I basically want?’ When Williams makes claims about reasons, these claims are about what might motivate us. That is why he rejects the view that some lives are intrinsically better than others. Since Williams uses the phrase ‘a reason’ in a motivational sense, and he assumes that normativity involves reasons, his normative claims are all psychological claims, which are at most weakly normative.
Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.