Deliberation and Spontaneity

This chapter argues that in some contexts, deliberation may have a limited role to play in making our spontaneous reactions more virtuous. The chapter begins by considering the arguments of Peter Railton, and Nomy Arpaly and Timothy Schroeder, that deliberation cannot be foundational for action. Then, the chapter examines cases in which agents appear to act ethically in spite of their deliberative reasoning. Even perfect deliberation can undermine ethical action, the chapter argues. In the case of overcoming implicit bias, the relationship between spontaneity and deliberation is fraught too. Even when deliberation appears to be playing a central role in guiding our decisions and behavior, things may be considerably more complicated.