Simply, false

Analysis 69 (1):69-78 (2009)
According to the Simple View (SV) of intentional action famously refuted by Bratman (1984 & 1987), A-ing is intentional only if the agent intended to A. In this paper I show that none of five different objections to Bratman's counter-example – McCann's (1991), Garcia's (1990), Sverdlik's (1996), Stout's (2005), and Adams's (1986) – works. Therefore Bratman's contention that SV is false still stands.
Keywords Simple View  Bratman  Intentional Action  Intention
Categories (categorize this paper)
 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: 9,351
External links
  • Through your library Configure
    References found in this work BETA
    Michael Bratman (1984). Two Faces of Intention. Philosophical Review 93 (3):375-405.
    Citations of this work BETA
    Ezio Di Nucci (2013). Embryo Loss and Double Effect. Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (8):537-540.

    View all 6 citations

    Similar books and articles

    Monthly downloads

    Added to index


    Total downloads

    61 ( #20,684 of 1,088,370 )

    Recent downloads (6 months)

    1 ( #69,449 of 1,088,370 )

    How can I increase my downloads?

    My notes
    Sign in to use this feature

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