David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
In Brian P. McLaughlin & Jonathan D. Cohen (eds.), Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Mind. Blackwell. 85--102 (2007)
The aim of this chapter is to defend the claim that “the intentional is normative” against a number of objections, including those that Georges Rey has presented in his contribution to this volume. First, I give a quick sketch of the principal argument that I have used to support this claim, and briefly comment on Rey’s criticisms of this argument. Next, I try to answer the main objections that have been raised against this claim. First, it may seem that the claim that “the intentional is normative” is just hopelessly Panglossian: doesn’t this claim just wilfully ignore all the mountains of evidence that we have for the sheer ubiquity and pervasiveness of human irrationality? Secondly, the claim that intentional mental states are essentially normative seems to be intended as a purely philosophical, non-empirical account of the nature of these mental states: but why should we think that purely philosophical reflection can tell us anything interesting about the nature of the mind -- shouldn’t we look to empirical psychology to enlighten us about such matters? I argue that neither of these objections succeeds in undermining my version of the claim that "the intentional is normative".
|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
Krister Bykvist & Anandi Hattiangadi (2007). Does Thought Imply Ought? Analysis 67 (296):277–285.
Jeff Speaks (2009). The Normativity of Content and 'the Frege Point'. European Journal of Philosophy 17 (3):405-415.
Inga Nayding (2011). Conceptual Evidentialism. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 92 (1):39-65.
Ralph Wedgwood (2010). The Nature of Normativity: Reply to Holton, Railton, and Lenman. [REVIEW] Philosophical Studies 151 (3):479-491.
Daniel Laurier (2011). Intentional Normativism Meets Normative Supervenience and the Because Constraint. Dialogue 50 (02):315-331.
Similar books and articles
George Pavlakos (2012). Correctness and Cognitivism. Remarks on Robert Alexy's Argument From the Claim to Correctness. Ratio Juris 25 (1):15-30.
Georges Rey (2007). Resisting Normativism in Psychology. In Brian P. McLaughlin & Jonathan D. Cohen (eds.), Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Mind. Blackwell.
Asbjørn Steglich-Petersen (2008). Against Essential Normativity of the Mental. Philosophical Studies 140 (2):263 - 283.
Ralph Wedgwood (forthcoming). The Right Thing to Believe. In Timothy Chan (ed.), The Aim of Belief. Oxford University Press.
Richard Evans (2009). Re-Expressing Normative Pragmatism. In Collective Intentionality VI, Berkeley.
Jonathan Webber & Robin Scaife (2013). Intentional Side-Effects of Action. Journal of Moral Philosophy 10 (2):179-203.
Anders Nes (2008). Are Only Mental Phenomena Intentional? Analysis 68 (299):205–215.
Ralph Wedgwood (2009). The Normativity of the Intentional. In Ansgar Beckermann & Brian P. McLaughlin (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the Philosophy of Mind. Oxford University Press.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads97 ( #11,464 of 1,098,967 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #287,052 of 1,098,967 )
How can I increase my downloads?