As the action-oriented perspective becomes more influential in philosophy of mind and philosophy of cognitive science, this volume offers a long-needed debate over foundational issues. Contributors: Fred Adams, Jesus H.
Aguilar, John Bishop, Andrei A. Mele, Michael S. Request changes or add full text files to a record.
Constitution, however, does not play this kind of explanatory role. It will be argued that agent-causation is, insofar as it is irreducible to event-causation, mysterious at best, totally unintelligible at worst. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 64 3 , Events have properties, may have certain properties essentially or accidentally, and can have relational properties. Omissions, especially intentional omissions, seem to be manifestations of our agency, but then one would hope that they would be captured by the CTA.
Email us: wrap warwick. Skip to content Skip to navigation.
The Library. Login Admin.
Teleology and causal understanding in children's theory of mind. ISBN Research output not available from this repository, contact author. Abstract The causal theory of action CTA is widely recognized in the literature of the philosophy of action as the "standard story" of human action and agency--the nearest approximation in the field to a theoretical orthodoxy. B Philosophy. Can agent-causation be rendered intelligible?
Author Buckareff, Andrei A. Metadata Show full item record. Abstract The doctrine of agent-causation has been suggested by many interested in defending libertarian theories of free action to provide the conceptual apparatus necessary to make the notion of incompatibility freedom intelligible.
In the present essay the conceptual viability of the doctrine of agent-causation will be assessed. It will be argued that agent-causation is, insofar as it is irreducible to event-causation, mysterious at best, totally unintelligible at worst. First, the arguments for agent-causation made by such eighteenth-century luminaries as Samuel Clarke and Thomas Reid will be considered alongside the defenses of agent-causation proffered in this century by C.
Summary, The Causal Theory of Action (CTA) is often referred to as "the standard by the theory and proposed solutions, see the introductory essay in Aguilar. This scepticism is best overcome, according to the author, by defending a causal theory of action, that is by establishing that actions are.
Campbell, Roderick Chisholm, and Richard Taylor. It will be shown that the case for agent-causation made by these figures is ultimately unconvincing. Two defenses of agent-causation made within the past ten years will then be taken up for examination and critique.
First, Timothy O'Connor's attempt at advancing an unrefined and unrepentant doctrine of agent-causation will be shown to suffer from the same maladies as its predecessors. Next, Randolph Clarke's causal agent-causal theory of free action, which seeks a via media between agent-causal theories of free action and causal theories of action, is examined.
Clarke's theory is an attempt at providing an account of how both events and agents qua substances can be the codeterminants of free actions. Despite the improvement of Clarke's theory over more conventional agent-causal theories of free action, it will be shown that agent-causation makes his theory more cumbersome than it needs to be. Clarke is able to get as much mileage out of a causal indeterminacy theory of action that does not require him to posit obscure agent-causes.
Finally, a sketch of an alternative theory of free action will be offered. While it may suffer from its own conceptual deficiencies, it may not suffer from the same conceptual problems as agent-causal theories of free action. Description Due to the character of the original source materials and the nature of batch digitization, quality control issues may be present in this document.
Please report any quality issues you encounter to digital library.