Graduate studies at Western
Journal of Scottish Philosophy 5 (2):187-212 (2007)
|Abstract||Libertarians, like Thomas Reid, hold that motives do not causally necessitate our choices. The problem that arises is to explain how the agent decides to act according to one motive and not the other. In light of some objections brought up by Leibniz and Edwards but also by contemporary compatibilists such as Haji and Goetz, I examine Thomas Reid's possible answer to this problem. I argue that to explain our choices Reid would appeal not only to motives and character traits but also to the amount of effort needed to choose what is best. I also address Reid's criticism of the implicit presupposition of the Principle of Suffi cient Reason. My aim is therefore to explore, clarify and defend Reid's account of agency in choicemaking.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Esther R. Kroeker (2009). Reid on Natural Signs, Taste and Moral Perception. In Sabine Roeser (ed.), Reid on Ethics. Palgrave Macmillan.
Terence Cuneo (2011). A Puzzle Regarding Reid's Theory of Motives. British Journal for the History of Philosophy 19 (5):963-981.
Xiangdong Xu (2011). Thomas Reid on Active Power and Free Agency. Frontiers of Philosophy in China 6 (3):369-389.
Rebecca Copenhaver (2006). Thomas Reid's Philosophy of Mind: Consciousness and Intentionality. Philosophy Compass 1 (3):279-289.
Amit Hagar (2002). Thomas Reid and Non-Euclidean Geometry. Reid Studies 5 (2):54-64.
Thomas Reid (1863/1975). Thomas Reid's Inquiry and Essays. Bobbs-Merrill.
Todd Buras (2002). The Problem with Reid's Direct Realism. Philosophical Quarterly 52 (209):457-477.
Nicholas Wolterstorff (2001). Thomas Reid and the Story of Epistemology. Cambridge University Press.
Added to index2010-07-11
Total downloads14 ( #90,570 of 739,347 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,538 of 739,347 )
How can I increase my downloads?