What does Joseph Raz have to contribute to social anthropology? Part II: a toxic anthropology based on classical rationality (Appendix: some BASIC homework)

Should philosophers have something to say to others or should they converse amongst themselves? It is a more difficult question than it may seem: “Obviously they should…” This is the second installment in my Joseph Raz and anthropology series. I examine Raz’s support for a classical doctrine about value and rationality: that a rational action is one which aims at something objectively valuable. The Enlightenment doctrine of rationality, from Hobbes and Hume, seems much better for doing social anthropology. This is not a clever paper, by the way.