Self-reflexive justificatory strategy¶

Theory · All theories
Evidence · no claims cited

Description¶

A justificatory strategy in which a theory or commitment is justified by applying to itself the very standards it endorses, without vicious circularity or question-begging. Siegel illustrates it with evolutionary theory, which "canself-reflexively explainits own evolution", and with epistemological theories of justification that theorists "regularly offeraccounts of epistemicjustification which they hope will bothsucceed... and also will turn out themselvesto be justified in their ownterms". He then applies the strategy to rationality itself: the skeptic's serious posing of 'Why be rational?' presupposes the epistemic force of reasons, thereby securing the answer.

Design Implications¶

Context¶

Requirements¶

• The question or position must be seriously posed by a questioner who acknowledges the potential epistemic force of putative reasons; the strategy works only from within an argumentative context.

Constraints¶

• Siegel notes the sort of presupposition at work — logical, semantic, or pragmatic — would take more space than he has to establish, though he believes rationality is presupposed in all three senses.

Target Learners¶

• students in elementary, secondary and higher education being taught critical thinking

Target Learning Objectives¶

• understanding and valuing rationality as the basis of critical thinking

Claims¶

Related Theories¶

• Siegel's reasons conception: critical thinking as being appropriately moved by reasons: Siegel's account of critical thinking as being moved by reasons, which this argument defends
• Siegel's broad rationality: critical thinking as an educational and moral ideal grounding Constructivism: rationality as the ideal the argument justifies

Examples¶

-

Key Sources¶

• Siegel, Harvey. (1989). Why Be Rational? On Thinking Critically about Critical Thinking. Resource Publication, Series 2 No. 1. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED352333