David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Theoria 77 (4):312-332 (2011)
In this article, I challenge the dominant view of the importance of the debate over action-individuation. On the dominant view, it is held that the conclusions we reach about action-individuation make little or no difference for other debates in the philosophy of action, much less in other areas of philosophy. As a means of showing that the dominant view is mistaken, I consider the implications of accepting a given theory of action-individuation for thinking about doxastic agency. In particular, I am interested in the implications for thinking about the variety of evaluative control we can exercise over the formation of our doxastic attitudes. I show that our assumptions about how to individuate actions matters for how we think about doxastic agency and, hence, the conclusions we reach about action-individuation are of greater significance than some have thought
|Keywords||doxastic voluntarism action‐individuation mental agency agency mental action doxastic agency action belief|
|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
John Heil (2003). From an Ontological Point of View. Oxford University Press.
Nishi Shah & J. David Velleman (2005). Doxastic Deliberation. Philosophical Review 114 (4):497-534.
Alfred R. Mele (2003). Motivation and Agency. Oxford University Press.
G. E. M. Anscombe (1957). Intention. Harvard University Press.
Alvin I. Goldman (1970). A Theory of Human Action. Princeton University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Andrei A. Buckareff (2005). An Essay on Doxastic Agency. Dissertation, University of Rochester
Andrei A. Buckareff (2006). Doxastic Decisions and Controlling Belief. Acta Analytica 21 (1):102-114.
Andrei A. Buckareff (2006). Compatibilism and Doxastic Control. Philosophia 34 (2):143-152.
Conor Mchugh (2014). Exercising Doxastic Freedom. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 88 (1):1-37.
Carl Ginet (1990). On Action. Cambridge University Press.
Joseph Ulatowski (2012). Act Individuation: An Experimental Approach. Review of Philosophy and Psychology 3 (2):249-262.
Hugh J. McCann (1998). The Works of Agency: On Human Action, Will, and Freedom. Cornell University Press.
Chauncey Maher (2011). Action Individuation: A Normative Functionalist Approach. Philosophical Explorations 14 (1):99-116.
Elisabeth Pacherie (2012). The Phenomenology of Joint Action: Self-Agency Vs. Joint-Agency. In Seemann Axel (ed.), Joint Attention: New Developments. MIT Press
Elisabeth Pacherie (2007). The Sense of Control and the Sense of Agency. Psyche 13 (1):1 - 30.
Matthew Boyle (2011). 'Making Up Your Mind' and the Activity of Reason. Philosophers' Imprint 11 (17).
Markus E. Schlosser (2010). Agency, Ownership, and the Standard Theory. In A. Buckareff, J. Aguilar & K. Frankish (eds.), New Waves in the Philosophy of Action. Palgrave Macmillan 13-31.
Wayne Wu (2013). Mental Action and the Threat of Automaticity. In Andy Clark, Julian Kiverstein & Tillman Vierkant (eds.), Decomposing the Will. Oxford University Press 244-61.
Ralf Stoecker (1998). Tun Und Lassen – Überlegungen Zur Ontologie Menschlichen Handelns. Erkenntnis 48 (2-3):395-413.
Komarine Romdenh-Romluc (2011). Agency and Embodied Cognition. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 111 (1pt1):79-95.
Added to index2011-06-30
Total downloads106 ( #37,048 of 1,906,955 )
Recent downloads (6 months)14 ( #45,644 of 1,906,955 )
How can I increase my downloads?