Fitting-Attitude Analysis
‘Fitting-Attitude Analysis’ introduces fitting-attitude (FA) analysis. This pattern of value analysis has received considerable attention over the past two decades, and various iterations of it have been proposed and discussed. After having outlined some of the advantages of FA analysis, it is made clear why we should be neither too confident about its success nor too worried about the challenges it faces. A large part of the chapter deals with different challenges to FA analysis, including a recent attempt (which goes back to Franz Brentano) to handle the so-called ‘wrong kind of reason’ problem. The chapter also considers an issue that has received less attention in the literature, which again takes us back to Brentano. G. E. Moore argued that Brentano was wrong in his analysis of what it is for something to be more valuable than something else is. It is argued that Moore was wrong on this matter. In this connection, a way of understanding the strength and weight of reasons is proposed. The proposal is hard to avoid if the FA advocate understands the notion of reason to be primitive in his analysis. The chapter ends by discussing some recent challenges to FA analysis that arise in the wake of the insight that reasons are agency-dependent, but values are not. Once we modify the standard FA analysis in a certain way, these challenges turn out to be less serious than they appear.