Keyboard Shortcuts?

×
  • →Next step
  • ←Previous step
  • ↓Skip this slide
  • ↑Previous slide
  • mShow slide thumbnails
  • nShow notes
  • hShow handout latex source
  • NShow talk notes latex source

Click here and press the right key for the next slide (or swipe left)

also ...

Press the left key to go backwards (or swipe right)

Press n to toggle whether notes are shown (or add '?notes' to the url before the #)

Press m or double tap to slide thumbnails (menu)

Press ? at any time to show the keyboard shortcuts

\title {Central Themes in Philosophy \\ Lecture 13}
 
\maketitle
 

Lecture 13:

Central Themes

\def \ititle {Lecture 13}
\def \isubtitle {Central Themes}
\begin{center}
{\Large
\textbf{\ititle}: \isubtitle
}
 
\iemail %
\end{center}

Q

What is the mark that distinguishes actions?

\citep{Davidson:1971fz}.
distinguishes them from what?

‘The problem of action is to explicate the contrast between
what an agent does
and
what merely happens to him’

\citep[p.~157]{frankfurt1978problem}.

Frankfurt, 1978 p. 157

We’re not from the 1970s (well I am), so ...

Plan

1. The standard story (‘causal theories’).

2. Frankfurt’s objections to the standard story.

 

Action: Three Basic Principles

 
\section{Action: Three Basic Principles}
 
\section{Action: Three Basic Principles}

1

actions have hierarchical structures

changing the nappy is one action, but it has proper parts which are also actions.
The structure is even more complex that this suggests; consider an apparently simple action like movig the nappy ...

1

actions have hierarchical structures

2

actions are individuated by outcomes

one is distinguished from another. As when I ask, ’What is she doing?’
An outcome is a possible or actual state of affairs.

What has she done?

- She killed the king.

Outcome: the killing of the king.

Not all outcomes are actual.

What is she doing?

- Digging a 6ft hole.

Will she succeed?

- No.

Not all outcomes are end states;

nor need they be consequences of actions.

What did he do?

- He reached for his gun.

Actions are individuated by outcomes.

type vs token

Ayesha and Alfie are raising money by running 10k.

Ayesha is running 10k.

Alfie is running 10k.

One can fail while the other succeeds.

2

actions are individuated by outcomes

But what *are* bodily actions?

bodily configuration

joint displacement

outcome

3

one action can have multiple descriptions (the accordion effect)

Recall this example ...

What has she done?

- She killed the king.

Outcome: the killing of the king.

How?

- She put poison in his ear.

How?

- She poured it from a bottle.

One action, many possible and actual outcomes.

You can use any outcome to describe the action.

1

actions have hierarchical structures

2

actions are individuated by outcomes

3

one action can have multiple descriptions (the accordion effect)

 

Causes of Action: Belief and Desire

 
\section{Causes of Action: Belief and Desire}
 
\section{Causes of Action: Belief and Desire}

Ahmed’s next action will be either to pull the lever or to press the button (but he cannot do both).

If he pulls the lever, a forest rat will fall on his head.

If he pushes the button, he will get ten dollars.

Will Ahmed pull the lever?

silly question

What is the minimum you need to know in order to know what Ahmed will do?

Will Ahmed pull the lever?

Ahmed desires forest rat most.Ahmed desires ten dollars most.
Ahmed believes truly.

✔

✘

Ahmed believes reverse-ly.

✘

✔

Action is a function of belief and desire.

Same idea from the perspective of decision theory

Action is a function of belief and desire.

 

Intention

 
\section{Intention}
 
\section{Intention}

Action is a function of belief and desire.

I desire to bring the Martian home.

I believe I can bring him home by sending a rescue mission.

I desire to alleviate global poverty.

I believe I can alleviate global poverty by giving money directly.

Action is a function of belief and desire.

I want to earn more money.

I believe I can earn more money by getting a new job.

I want to take it easy today.

I believe I can take it easy today by not getting a new job today.

Belief and desire alone are not sufficient for action.

Simple Idea

Your beliefs and desires shape deliberation about what to do.

Deliberation characteristically results in intention.

Intentions control action.

Ex

I desire to nurture squirrels.

I believe I can do so by building a squirrel house.

therefore:

[Intention] I shall build a squirrel house next Tuesday.

Claim: without the intention, belief and desire would not lead to action in this case. (Intention is no guarantee, of course)
Unless I want to drift through my life, at some point I just have to decide and make a plan. Intention is the upshot of the plan.

I want to earn more money.

I believe I can earn more money by getting a new job.

I want to take it easy today.

I believe I can take it easy today by not getting a new job today.

[Intention] Get a new job (somewhen).

[Intention] Take it easy today.

What is wrong with this combination of intentions?

principle of agglommeration

Nothing irrational about not agglommerating desires ...

conclusion

In conclusion, ...

Q

What is the mark that distinguishes actions?

\citep{Davidson:1971fz}.

‘The problem of action is to explicate the contrast between
what an agent does
and
what merely happens to him’

\citep[p.~157]{frankfurt1978problem}.

Frankfurt, 1978 p. 157

It is intention.

‘According to causal theories [...] the essential difference between events of the two types [actions vs things that merely happen to an agent] is to be found in their prior causal histories: a [pattern of joint displacements and bodily configurations] is an action if and only if it results from antecedents of a certain kind.’

\citep[p.~157]{frankfurt1978problem}.

Frankfurt, 1978 p. 157