How (not) to think about mental action

Philosophical Explorations 8 (1):83-89 (2005)
Abstract
I examine Galen Strawson's recent work on mental action in his paper, 'Mental Ballistics or The Involuntariness of Spontaneity'. I argue that his account of mental action is too restrictive. I offer a means of testing tokens of mental activity types to determine if they are actional. The upshot is that a good deal more mental activity than Strawson admits is actional.
Keywords Intention  Mental Act  Metaphysics  Trying  Strawson, G
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1080/1386979042000328846
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
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 20,860
External links
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

View all 20 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Anika Fiebich & John Michael (2015). Mental Actions and Mental Agency. Review of Philosophy and Psychology 6 (4):683-693.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2009-01-28

Total downloads

120 ( #31,836 of 1,907,046 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

10 ( #67,846 of 1,907,046 )

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.