'Ought': The correct intention account

Philosophical Explorations 12 (3):297-317 (2009)
“S ought (not) to see to it that p at t” is true iff an intention on the part of S to see to it that p at t is (in) correct. From this truth condition follows an understanding of the conceptual role of ought-claims in practical inference: ought-claims are interchangeable with intentions having the same content. From this conceptual role, it is quite clear why first-person, present-tense ought-judgments, and just those, motivate: failure to be motivated is a failure of rationality. The point and purpose of 'ought' is mainly to express the results of practical reasoning performed on premises held hypothetically, an exercise of which there are many varieties. Our capacity for normative thought and language is a consequence of, and intimately related to, our capacity for practical thought.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2011
DOI 10.1080/13869790903067667
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history
Request removal from index
Download options
Our Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 25,651
External links

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
Thinking How to Live.Allan Gibbard - 2003 - Harvard University Press.
Ruling Passions.Simon Blackburn - 1998 - Oxford University Press.
Counterfactuals.David K. Lewis - 1973 - Blackwell.
Essays on Actions and Events.Donald Davidson - 1980 - Oxford University Press.

View all 30 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Are Intentions Self-Referential?Alfred R. Mele - 1987 - Philosophical Studies 52 (3):309-329.
Reasoning to Obligation.Barbara Herman - 2006 - Inquiry 49 (1):44 – 61.
Intention and Motor Representation in Purposive Action.Stephen Andrew Butterfill & Corrado Sinigaglia - 2014 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 88 (1):119-145.
Normative Practical Reasoning: John Broome.John Broome - 2001 - Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 75 (1):175–193.
We-Intentions Revisited.Raimo Tuomela - 2005 - Philosophical Studies 125 (3):327 - 369.
Normative Practical Reasoning.Christian Piller - 2001 - Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 75 (1):175 - 216.

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

22 ( #218,580 of 2,143,564 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

1 ( #386,855 of 2,143,564 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.

Other forums