Brunero’s Non-Normative Disjunctivism and Means-Ends Reasoning

On Brunero's non-normative disjunctivism, agents exhibiting means-ends incoherence are irrational because they are guaranteed to have at least one attitude that fails to achieve its constitutive aim, and such an aim failure is not a failure of reason.This paper primarily aims to show that this account fails to adequately explain the irrationality of means-ends incoherence.More specifically, I argue that agents exhibiting this incoherence can be justifiably criticized for irrationality, and they cannot ward off such criticism by claiming that there is no reason to be means-ends coherent.Furthermore, I argue that Brunero's three objections to the strong normativity of means-ends coherence are not successful.