Two Dogmas of Moral Psychology

Abstract
I contend that there are two dogmas that are still popular among philosophers of action: that agents can only desire what they think is good and that they can only intentionally pursue what they think is good. I also argue that both dogmas are false. Broadly, I argue that our best theories of action can explain the possibility of intentionally pursuing what one thinks is not at all good, that we need to allow for the possibility of intentionally pursuing what one think is not at all good, and that if we can intentionally pursue what we think is not at all good then we can desire it on similar grounds.
Keywords desiring the bad  moral psychology  rationalization
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index Translate to english
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive
External links This entry has no external links. Add one.
Through your library Only published papers are available at libraries
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Similar books and articles
Analytics

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2009-06-09

Total downloads

169 ( #3,028 of 1,088,782 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

27 ( #3,727 of 1,088,782 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Start a new thread
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.