Modest Sociality: Continuities and Discontinuities

Journal of Social Ontology 1 (1):17-26 (2014)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

A central claim in Michael Bratman’s account of shared agency is that there need be no radical conceptual, metaphysical or normative discontinuity between robust forms of small-scale shared intentional agency, i.e., modest sociality, and individual planning agency. What I propose to do is consider another potential discontinuity, whose existence would throw doubt on his contention that the structure of a robust form of modest sociality is entirely continuous with structures at work in individual planning agency. My main point will be that he may be wrong in assuming that the basic cognitive infrastructure sufficient to support individual agency doesn’t have to be supplemented in significant ways to support shared agency.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 96,310

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2016-04-15

Downloads
46 (#379,102)

6 months
13 (#396,078)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Elisabeth Pacherie
Institut Jean Nicod

Citations of this work

Reductive Views of Shared Intention.Facundo M. Alonso - 2016 - In Kirk Ludwig & Marija Jankovic (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Collective Intentionality. New York: Routledge.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Intention, plans, and practical reason.Michael Bratman - 1987 - Cambridge: Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
On Social Facts.Margaret Gilbert - 1989 - Ethics 102 (4):853-856.
Collective Intentions and Actions.John Searle - 1990 - In Philip R. Cohen Jerry Morgan & Martha Pollack (eds.), Intentions in Communication. MIT Press. pp. 401-415.

View all 9 references / Add more references