A New Defense of the Rationalist Solution to Kavka’s Toxin Puzzle

Abstract The rationalist solution to Kavka’s toxin puzzle, advocated by Gauthier, asserts that it is rational to drink a vial of toxin as initially intended. However, this account faces two serious objections. Bratman argues that Gauthier’s account does not do justice to the temporal nature of the toxin scenario. And Levy objects that it depends on a problematic assumption that the rationality of a course of action transfers to its constituent action. This article aims to defend the rationalist solution against these objections. In response to Bratman’s objection, I argue that it is based on two problematic assumptions. Regarding Levy’s objection, I argue that the rationalist solution does not have to rely on the problematic assumption that the rationality of a course of action transfers to its constituent action.