Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Preface
- Notes on Contributors
- Agency and Actions
- Two Ways of Explaining Actions
- Anscombe on ‘Practical Knowledge’
- Action, the Act Requirement and Criminal Liability
- Emotion, Cognition and Action
- Kantian Autonomy
- The Structure of Orthonomy
- Normativity and the Will
- Can Libertarians Make Promises?
- Intention as Faith
- The Destruction of the World Trade Center and the Law on Event-identity
Agency and Actions
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 September 2010
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Preface
- Notes on Contributors
- Agency and Actions
- Two Ways of Explaining Actions
- Anscombe on ‘Practical Knowledge’
- Action, the Act Requirement and Criminal Liability
- Emotion, Cognition and Action
- Kantian Autonomy
- The Structure of Orthonomy
- Normativity and the Will
- Can Libertarians Make Promises?
- Intention as Faith
- The Destruction of the World Trade Center and the Law on Event-identity
Summary
Among philosophical questions about human agency, one can distinguish in a rough and ready way between those that arise in philosophy of mind and those that arise in ethics. In philosophy of mind, one central aim has been to account for the place of agents in a world whose operations are supposedly ‘physical’. In ethics, one central aim has been to account for the connexion between ethical species of normativity and the distinctive deliberative and practical capacities of human beings. Ethics then is involved with questions of moral psychology whose answers admit a kind of richness in the life of human beings from which the philosophy of mind may ordinarily prescind. Philosophy of mind, insofar as it treats the phenomenon of agency as one facet of the phenomenon of mentality, has been more concerned with how there can be ‘mental causation’ than with any details of a story of human motivation or of the place of evaluative commitments within such a story.
This little account of the different agenda of two philosophical approaches to human agency is intended only to speak to the state of play as we have it, and it is certainly somewhat artificial. I offer it here as a way to make sense of attitudes to what has come to be known as the standard story of action. The standard story is assumed to be the orthodoxy on which philosophers of mind, who deal with the broad metaphysical questions, have converged, but it is held to be deficient when it comes to specifically ethical questions.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Agency and Action , pp. 1 - 24Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2004
- 34
- Cited by