Your email address:Powered by FeedBlitz
« Tim Scanlon on Free Speech |
| Will Kymlicka on Minority Rights »
What is it for someone to do something on purpose? Jennifer Hornsby gives her account in conversation with Nigel Warburton.
Listen to Jennifer Hornsby on Human Agency
Posted at 09:00 PM in Mind | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834516cc769e200e55295bf638833
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Jennifer Hornsby on Human Agency:
I listened to this twice and I still don't get it.
June 09, 2008 at 02:05 AM
Me too, and I don't get it either. Surely the idea that 'someone who knows the eprson'woukld understand their motivation for doign somethign is an appeal to the 'standard model' because it's surely based on insights into their internal mental processes.
Jennifer talks about the standard model denying the person's agency by looking for internal and external causes, but why should we assume special status for people as agents? On what basis is that justified? And if we can find inetrnal and external causes for behaviour then surely those are perfectly valid grounds to denying special agency?
Her argument seems to be that we should just not think about it. Surely that can't be right, but I don't honestly know what she means.
Simon Hibbs |
June 26, 2008 at 03:03 PM
How absurd... Hornsby is butting against reality. She wants to use (of a person crossing the street to catch a bus) the "fact of their acting intentionally" as a sufficient causal narrative, with, as the host says, "nothing further to look for". I'm sorry- that is simply sticking one's philosophical head in the sand. Theists want to keep human agency out of the causal physical realm, and they will have to do a better job of it than simply saying that it ain't so, particularly when neuroscience is looking at our intentions in great detail and finding them even prior to conscious awareness. Thanks to the hosts for asking good questions, but they were awfully, awfully polite with Hornsby's non-answers.
Burk Braun |
December 11, 2008 at 10:10 PM
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.
(URLs automatically linked.)
(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)
Name is required to post a comment
Please enter a valid email address
Edmonds and Warburton: Philosophy Bites
Edmonds and Warburton: Philosophy Bites Back
David Edmonds: Would You Kill the Fat Man?
David Edmonds: Caste Wars: The Philosophy of Discrimination
David Edmonds and John Eidinow: Rousseau's Dog: A Tale of Two Philosophers
David Edmonds and John Eidinow: Bobby Fischer Goes to War
David Edmonds and John Eidinow: Wittgenstein's Poker
Nigel Warburton: Philosophy: The Basics
Nigel Warburton: A Little History of Philosophy
Nigel Warburton: Free Speech: A Very Short Introduction
Nigel Warburton: The Basics of Essay Writing
Nigel Warburton: Thinking from A to Z
Nigel Warburton: Erno Goldfinger: The Life of an Architect
Nigel Warburton: Philosophy: The Essential Study Guide
Nigel Warburton: The Art Question
Nigel Warburton: Freedom: An Introduction with Readings
Nigel Warburton: Philosophy: The Classics