David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophy Research Archives 11:355-378 (1985)
This paper assumes that human choices are determined, and distinguishes among the views of some classical modern philosophers regarding what determines choice.Hobbes and Hume are taken as representatives of choice as determined by subjective propensities; the differences between their views is discussed. Descartes is taken as a major representative of the view that choice is determined by an apprehension of that which is objectively good, and Spinoza, Malebranche, and Leibniz are discussed insofar as they share that view. It is then shown that interpretations of Locke and Mill whieh assimilate their views to those of Hobbes and Hume are mistaken.As a third alternative, the self-determinist positions of Green and Dewey are discussed. The views of James, in which attention and effort are key concepts, are traced, and that aspect of his view whieh stresses attention is accepted, while his emphasis on effort is rejected
|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
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Richard Holton (2006). The Act of Choice. Philosophers' Imprint 6 (3):1-15.
Ruth Chang (2012). Are Hard Choices Cases of Incomparability? Philosophical Issues 22 (1):106-126.
A. Gombay (1991). Psychic Determinism: Leibniz and Freud. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 5 (3):205 – 213.
Randolph Clarke (1999). Free Choice, Effort, and Wanting More. Philosophical Explorations 2 (1):20-41.
Daniel Pekarsky (1983). Moral Choice and Education. Journal of Moral Education 12 (1):3-13.
J. S. Biehl (2008). The Insignificance of Choice. In David Chan (ed.), Moral Psychology Today: Essays on Value, Rational Choice, and the Will. Springer 110--75.
Jules Holroyd (2010). Substantively Constrained Choice and Deference. Journal of Moral Philosophy 7 (2):180-199.
Akira Utsumi (2011). Computational Exploration of Metaphor Comprehension Processes Using a Semantic Space Model. Cognitive Science 35 (2):251-296.
Michael J. Murray (2005). Spontaneity and Freedom in Leibniz. In Donald Rutherford & J. A. Cover (eds.), Leibniz: Nature and Freedom. Oxford University Press 194--216.
Jason Shepard & Shane Reuter (2012). Neuroscience, Choice, and the Free Will Debate. American Journal of Bioethics - Neuroscience 3 (3):7-11.
Added to index2011-12-02
Total downloads12 ( #354,106 of 1,902,889 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #324,369 of 1,902,889 )
How can I increase my downloads?