The most important debates and controversies about “Practical Reason” in the philosophical debate should be introduced and explained. By the example of the text of Haidt the problems and difficulties in this research should be outlined and how this contribution (Haidt) has weaknesses. A personal stance should be explained in the end.All can be in notes (and bullet points), but should be structured clearly and should use the sources given. (The Online source is only important for the other papers cited).(In this classic paper, psychologist J. Haidt argues that moral judgements are primarily post-hoc rationalisations of moral intuitions. Haidt stresses that social factors play a central role in this process, as compared to an individual’s private reasoning.)— * Haidt, J. (2001): The Emotional Dog and Its Rational Tail, Psychological Review 108(4): 81-100— Williams, B. (1979): Internal and External Reasons, in his “Moral Luck”, Cambridge: CUP (1981), 101-13— Korsgaard, C. (1986): Skepticism about Practical Reason, Journal of Philosophy, 83:5-26— Mercier and Sperber, Why do humans reason? BBS 2011https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/practical-reason/https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/reasoning-moral/- no introduction or conclusion or very general part is needed; only the critique developed concerning haidts paper. This does also not need to be presented or explained anymore. Rather the debates criticising it are of concern.
