Two Dogmas of Moral Psychology

Abstract

I contend that there are two dogmas that are still popular among philosophers of action: that agents can only desire what they think is good and that they can only intentionally pursue what they think is good. I also argue that both dogmas are false. Broadly, I argue that our best theories of action can explain the possibility of intentionally pursuing what one thinks is not at all good, that we need to allow for the possibility of intentionally pursuing what one think is not at all good, and that if we can intentionally pursue what we think is not at all good then we can desire it on similar grounds.

Links

PhilArchive

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Similar books and articles

On trying to save the simple view.Thomas Nadelhoffer - 2006 - Mind and Language 21 (5):565-586.
Folk Psychology and Moral Evaluation.Julie Yoo - 2004 - Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology 24 (2):237-251.
Intentional action and the praise-blame asymmetry.Frank Hindriks - 2008 - Philosophical Quarterly 58 (233):630-641.
Unintentionally biasing the data: Reply to Knobe.Roblin R. Meeks - 2004 - Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology 24 (2):220-223.
Desiring the bad: An essay in moral psychology.Michael Stocker - 1979 - Journal of Philosophy 76 (12):738-753.
The Guise of the Good.J. David Velleman - 1992 - Noûs 26 (1):3 - 26.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-06-09

Downloads
622 (#26,377)

6 months
64 (#65,925)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Peter Brian Barry
Saginaw Valley State University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references