David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophical Explorations 13 (1):65 – 79 (2010)
In 'A Theory of Human Action' (1970) Alvin Goldman launched an attack on what has become known as the Anscombe-Davidson Identity Thesis. In brief, this is the thesis that our acts are our body movements, and that all the different effects of that movement do not entail that different acts have been performed, but only that an identical act has different descriptions. In her response to Goldman, Anscombe (1981) claims that Goldman is arguing at cross-purposes. I will argue that this is partially true, but only because she accepts what I shall call the Symmetry Thesis. This thesis in turn is natural if you accept a third thesis called the Irreducibility Thesis. These three theses form a consistent set that the defenders of the Identity Thesis would accept and its detractors would deny. It follows that the best way to attack the Identity Thesis is to attack the Irreducibility Thesis on which it is based. I believe that this can be done and that Goldman is basically right, but I will not be concerned with a full defense of Goldman's method of individuating actions against its competitors. Rather, I want to show the grounds, some of them extralogical, upon which preference can be made
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Donald Davidson (1980). Essays on Actions and Events. Oxford University Press.
Alvin I. Goldman (1970). A Theory of Human Action. Princeton University Press.
G. E. M. Anscombe (1981). Metaphysics and the Philosophy of Mind. University of Minnesota Press.
Roderick Chisholm (1970). Events and Propositions. Noûs 4 (1):15-24.
Alvin I. Goldman (1971). The Individuation of Action. Journal of Philosophy 68 (21):761-774.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Michael J. Almeida (2004). Supervenience and Property-Identical Divine-Command Theory. Religious Studies 40 (3):323-333.
Mark Schroeder (2011). Buck-Passers' Negative Thesis. Philosophical Explorations 12 (3):341-347.
James Morauta (2004). Three Separation Theses. Law and Philosophy 23 (2):111-135.
Mark Jago (2009). The Conjunction and Disjunction Theses. Mind 118 (470):411-415.
Warren Shrader (2008). On the Relevance of Supervenience Theses to Physicalism. Acta Analytica 23 (3):257-271.
Davis Baird (1988). Five Theses on Instrumental Realism. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1988:165 - 173.
Sarah Sawyer (2002). In Defense of Burge's Thesis. Philosophical Studies 107 (2):109-28.
Gonzalo Rodriguez-Pereyra (2009). The Disjunction and Conjunction Theses. Mind 118 (470):427-443.
Added to index2010-05-07
Total downloads21 ( #137,372 of 1,726,249 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #231,316 of 1,726,249 )
How can I increase my downloads?