Comments on Artūrs Logins, Normative Reasons: Between Reasons and Explanation

Comments on LoginsIn Normative Reasons: Between Reasons and Explanation, Artūrs Logins seeks to reconcile views about the nature of reasons that seem to be in opposition.There are at least two such reconciling projects in the book that I will discuss in these comments.The first, which is the subject matter of the first five chapters, aims to develop a new account of normative reasons which incorporates insights from both the "Reasoning View" of reasons and the "Explanation View" of reasons while eschewing what Logins sees as serious flaws in both these theories.In the first four chapters.Logins explores the theories on offer before he offers his new proposal, "The Erotetic View" in Chap. 5 which states that "a normative reason to F is, roughly, a possible appropriate answer to the normative question 'Why F?'" and says "It integrates the best aspects of both the Reasoning and the Explanation views while avoiding their respective pitfalls."(Logins, 2022, 165).Key to Logins's view is that there are two different kinds of normative "Why" questions and so correspondingly two different kinds of normative reasons depending on which "Why question" is being asked.Sometimes I can ask why when seeking an explanation of a normative fact; I am asking what makes it the case that one ought to act in a certain way or have a certain attitude.These kinds of questions are not challenging whether it is the case that S ought to F; "In standard explanatory 'Why F?' contexts, the addresser of the question aims to arrive at a better understanding of the normative fact that S ought to F." (2022, 170) The other kind of "Why F" question seeks an argument or a justification that establishes that the normative fact in