more on this theme     |     more from this thinker


Single Idea 20018

[filed under theme 20. Action / C. Motives for Action / 2. Acting on Beliefs / b. Action cognitivism ]

Full Idea

Strong Cognitivists say intentions/beliefs are not based on observation or evidence, and are causally reliable in leading to appropriate actions, so this is a mode of 'practical' knowledge that has not been derived from observation.

Gist of Idea

Strong Cognitivism implies a mode of 'practical' knowledge, not based on observation

Source

Wilson,G/Schpall,S (Action [2012], 1.1)

Book Ref

'Stanford Online Encyclopaedia of Philosophy', ed/tr. Stanford University [plato.stanford.edu], p.3


A Reaction

[compressed - Stanford unnecessarily verbose!] I see no mention in this discussion of 'hoping' that your action will turn out OK. We are usually right to hope, but it would be foolish to say that when we reach for the salt we know we won't knock it over.

Related Idea

Idea 20016 Strong Cognitivism identifies an intention to act with a belief [Wilson/Schpall]


The 15 ideas from 'Action'

It is generally assumed that reason explanations are causal [Wilson/Schpall]
Maybe the explanation of an action is in the reasons that make it intelligible to the agent [Wilson/Schpall]
Actions include: the involuntary, the purposeful, the intentional, and the self-consciously autonomous [Wilson/Schpall]
Strong Cognitivism identifies an intention to act with a belief [Wilson/Schpall]
Weak Cognitivism says intentions are only partly constituted by a belief [Wilson/Schpall]
Strong Cognitivism implies a mode of 'practical' knowledge, not based on observation [Wilson/Schpall]
Maybe bodily movements are not actions, but only part of an agent's action of moving [Wilson/Schpall]
Is the action the arm movement, the whole causal process, or just the trying to do it? [Wilson/Schpall]
To be intentional, an action must succeed in the manner in which it was planned [Wilson/Schpall]
If someone believes they can control the lottery, and then wins, the relevant skill is missing [Wilson/Schpall]
We might intend two ways to acting, knowing only one of them can succeed [Wilson/Schpall]
Groups may act for reasons held by none of the members, so maybe groups are agents [Wilson/Schpall]
If there are shared obligations and intentions, we may need a primitive notion of 'joint commitment' [Wilson/Schpall]
Causalists allow purposive explanations, but then reduce the purpose to the action's cause [Wilson/Schpall]
On one model, an intention is belief-desire states, and intentional actions relate to beliefs and desires [Wilson/Schpall]