Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T23:57:30.357Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

11 - Outcomes of Internal Conflicts in the Sphere of Akrasia and Self-Control

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 December 2009

Alfred R. Mele
Affiliation:
Professor of Philosophy, Florida State University, Tallahassee
Peter Baumann
Affiliation:
University of Aberdeen
Monika Betzler
Affiliation:
Georg-August-Universität, Göttingen, Germany
Get access

Summary

Practical conflicts include conflicts in agents who judge, from the perspective of their own values, desires, beliefs, and the like, that one prospective course of action is superior to another but are tempted by what they judge to be the inferior course of action. A man who wants a late-night snack, even though he judges it best, from the identified perspective, to abide by his recent New Year's resolution against eating such snacks until he has lost ten pounds, is the locus of a practical conflict. So is a woman who judges it best (in the same way) to run a mile this morning but is tempted to spend the entire morning working in her office instead. The topic of this essay is practical outcomes of conflicts of this kind. My concern, more specifically, is with outcomes of two general kinds: akratic (from the classical Greek term akrasia: want of self-control) and enkratic (from enkrateia: self-control) actions.

Strict akratic action may be defined as free, sane, intentional action that the agent consciously believes at the time of action to be inferior to another course of action that is open to her then, inferior from the perspective of her own values, desires, beliefs, and the like. The belief against which an agent acts in strict akratic action may be termed a decisive belief.

Type
Chapter
Information
Practical Conflicts
New Philosophical Essays
, pp. 262 - 278
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ainslie, George. 1992. Picoeconomics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Aristotle. 1984. Nicomachean Ethics, tr. W. D. Ross, rev. J. O. Urmson. In The Complete Works of Aristotle: The Revised Oxford Translation, ed. Jonathan Barnes. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press
Audi, Robert. 1979. Weakness of Will and Practical Judgment. Noûs 13: 173–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baron, Jonathan. 1988. Thinking and Deciding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Bigelow, John, , S. Dodds, and , R. Pargetter, 1990. Temptation and the Will. American Philosophical Quarterly 27: 39–49Google Scholar
Davidson, Donald. 1980. How Is Weakness of the Will Possible? In Essays on Actions and Events. Oxford: Clarendon, 21–42
Davidson, Donald. 1985. Replies to Essays I–IX. In B. Vermazen and M. Hintikka (eds.), Essays on Davidson. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 159–229
Frankfurt, Harry. 1969. Alternate Possibilities and Moral Responsibility. Journal of Philosophy 66: 829–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frey, Dieter. 1986. Recent Research on Selective Exposure to Information. In L. Berkowitz (ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 19. New York: Academic Press
Friedrich, James. 1993. Primary Error Detection and Minimization PEDMIN Strategies in Social Cognition: A Reinterpretation of Confirmation Bias Phenomena. Psychological Review 100: 298–319CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gilovich, Thomas. 1991. How We Know What Isn't So. New York: Macmillan
Klayman, Joshua, and , Y.-W. Ha. 1987. Confirmation, Disconfirmation, and Information in Hypothesis Testing. Psychological Review 94: 211–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kunda, Ziva. 1987. Motivated Inference: Self-Serving Generation and Evaluation of Causal Theories. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 53: 636–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kunda, Ziva. 1990. The Case for Motivated Reasoning. Psychological Bulletin 108: 480–98CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kunda, Ziva. 1999. Social Cognition. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press
Mele, Alfred. 1987. Irrationality. New York: Oxford University Press
Mele, Alfred. 1992. Springs of Action. New York: Oxford University Press
Mele, Alfred. 1995. Autonomous Agents. New York: Oxford University Press
Mele, Alfred. 1996a. Addiction and Self-Control. Behavior and Philosophy 24: 99–117Google Scholar
Mele, Alfred. 1996b. Socratic Akratic Action. Philosophical Papers 25: 149–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mele, Alfred. 2001. Self-Deception Unmasked. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press
Mele, Alfred. 2002a. Akratics and Addicts. American Philosophical Quarterly 39: 153–67Google Scholar
Mele, Alfred. 2002b. Autonomy and Akrasia. Philosophical Explorations 5: 207–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mele, Alfred. 2003. Motivation and Agency. New York: Oxford University Press
Mele, Alfred, and , D. Robb. 1998. Rescuing Frankfurt-Style Cases. Philosophical Review 107: 97–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nisbett, Richard, and L. Ross. 1980. Human Inference: Strategies and Shortcomings of Social Judgment. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall
Pears, David. 1984. Motivated Irrationality. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Rorty, Amelie. 1980. Where Does the Akratic Break Take Place?Australasian Journal of Philosophy 58: 333–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, Shelley, and , S. Fiske. 1975. Point of View and Perceptions of Causality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 32: 439–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, Shelley, and S. Fiske. 1978. Salience, Attention and Attribution: Top of the Head Phenomena. In L. Berkowitz (ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 11. New York: Academic Press
Taylor, Shelley, and , S. Thompson. 1982. Stalking the Elusive “Vividness” Effect. Psychological Review 89: 155–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trope, Yaacov, and A. Liberman. 1996. Social Hypothesis Testing: Cognitive and Motivational Mechanisms. In E. T. Higgins and A. Kruglanski (eds.), Social Psychology: Handbook of Basic Principles. New York: Guilford Press
Trope, Yaacov, B. Gervey, and N. Liberman. 1997. Wishful Thinking from a Pragmatic Hypothesis-Testing Perspective. In M. Myslobodsky (ed.), The Mythomanias: The Nature of Deception and Self-Deception. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum
Tversky, Amos, and , D. Kahneman. 1973. Availability: A Heuristic for Judging Frequency and Probability. Cognitive Psychology 5: 207–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×