|Abstract||Bryne & H´ajek (1997) argue that Lewis’s (1988; 1996) objections to identifying desire with belief do not go through if our notion of desire is ‘causalized’ (characterized by causal, rather than evidential, decision theory). I argue that versions of the argument go through on certain assumptions about the formulation of decision theory. There is one version of causal decision theory where the original arguments cannot be formulated—the ‘imaging’ formulation that Joyce (1999) advocates. But I argue this formulation is independently objectionable. If we want to maintain the desire as belief thesis, there’s no shortcut through causalization.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Horacio Arlo-Costa, John Collins & Isaac Levi (1995). Desire-as-Belief Implies Opinionation or Indifference. Analysis 55 (1):2-5.
Huw Price (1989). Defending Desire-as-Belief. Mind 98 (January):119-27.
D. Collins (1988). Belief, Desire, and Revision. Mind 97 (July):333-42.
Philip Pettit & Michael Smith (1990). Backgrounding Desire. Philosophical Review 99 (4):565-592.
John Collins (1995). Desire-as-Belief Implies Opinionation or Indifference. Analysis 55 (1):2 - 5.
Steven Daskal (2010). Absolute Value as Belief. Philosophical Studies 148 (2).
Frank Jackson, Graham Priest, Alan Hájek & Philip Pettit (2004). Desire Beyond Belief. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 82 (1):77 – 92.
A. Hajek & Philip Pettit (2004). Desire Beyond Belief. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 82 (1):77-92.
Joel Marks (1982). A Theory of Emotion. Philosophical Studies 42 (1):227-242.
Added to index2009-12-09
Total downloads31 ( #39,385 of 549,198 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #19,303 of 549,198 )
How can I increase my downloads?