Authors |
|
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.
|
Keywords | desiring the bad moral psychology rationalization |
Categories | (categorize this paper) |
Options |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
Download options
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Judgements of Intentionality and Moral Worth: Experimental Challenges to Hindriks.Alessandro Lanteri - 2009 - Philosophical Quarterly 59 (237):713-720.
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.
Analytics
Added to PP index
2009-06-09
Total views
465 ( #19,969 of 2,505,180 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
8 ( #90,594 of 2,505,180 )
2009-06-09
Total views
465 ( #19,969 of 2,505,180 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
8 ( #90,594 of 2,505,180 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads