No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 13 April 2010
Philosophical inquiries in a particular field sometimes simply fade out. Interest shifts to new problems, the old problems come to seem intractable, philosophical curiosity does not survive the detailed work a glimpse of the solution discloses as necessary, or one finds that there is nothing new to say, that one can no longer be creative about the issues involved. But sometimes the loose ends are recognized and someone attempts to tie them up together and bring the inquiries to a more or less satisfactory conclusion. John Bishop has done this in his book about agency.
1 Pears, David, Motivated Irrationality (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1984).Google Scholar
2 Jackson, Frank, “What Mary Didn't Know,” Journal of Philosophy, 83 (1986): 291–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3 Kant, Immanuel, Kant's Critique of Practical Reason and Other Works on the Theory of Ethics, translated by Abbott, T. K., 6th ed. (London: Longmans, 1909), p. 190.Google Scholar
4 Davidson, Donald, Essays on Actions and Events (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1980), Essay 5.Google Scholar