The paper discusses how non-comparability affects practical reasoning, suggesting it has philosophical significance.
How do the colour blue and the number four relate with respect to their tastiness? Most disregard these cases of ‘non-comparability’ due to the fact that they seem to be of no interest when discussing practical reasoning. They are taken to be nonsensical and consequently do not cause a problem for everyday practical deliberation. In this paper, non-comparability is treated more carefully and not swiftly judged to be of no philosophical interest. It is argued that non-comparability constitutes support for the claim that there can be instantiated incomparability. First, several definitions of non-comparability are presented. Then a toy example is presented to show how non-comparability can cause a problem for practical deliberation. Finally, well-known discussions involving irreducible normative concepts are shown to constitute cases of non-comparability that are interesting from the perspective of practical reasoning. It is concluded that non-comparability provides substantial support for the possibility of instantiated incomparability.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Henrik Andersson (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched one closely related paper. Consider it for comparative context: