Understanding reasons without reenactment: Comment on Stueber

Daniel Hutto

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

3 Citations (Scopus)


This comment on Stueber’s article clarifies the nature of the core disagreement between his approach to understanding reasons and mine. The purely philosophical nature of the dispute is highlighted. It is argued that understanding someone’s narrative often suffices for understanding the person’s reasons in ordinary cases. It is observed that Stueber has yet to provide a compelling counter case. There is also a brief clarification of some of the empirical commitments of the narrative practice hypothesis.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)66-67
JournalEmotion Review
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - 2012


Dive into the research topics of 'Understanding reasons without reenactment: Comment on Stueber'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this