Perceptual Decision-Making and Beyond: Intention as Mental Imagery

A. Sims, M. Missal
{"title":"Perceptual Decision-Making and Beyond: Intention as Mental Imagery","authors":"A. Sims, M. Missal","doi":"10.1163/9789004409965_003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The standard view in the philosophy of action is the Causal Theory of Action (cta).1 On this view, a behavioural item counts as an intentional action if and only if it is caused by the appropriate sorts of mental states in the right kind of way. On most popular contemporary accounts (e.g. Searle 1983; Bratman 1987; Mele 1992; Pacherie 2008), the appropriate sort of mental state is an intention, with the intention construed as an attitude towards a proposition. The “right kind of way” is thought to be one in which the content of the intention propagates from an abstract level of description (e.g. the intention to investigate a noise) through to more fine-grained specifications that give a bodily movement a rational structure at the moment of bodily movement (e.g. the intention to switch on this light), and finally culminating in motor commands required to execute the right bodily movements. These levels of abstraction respectively correspond to so-called distal intention, proximal intention, and motor intention. These three kinds of intention have distinct roles in the overall dynamics of intentional action (Pacherie 2008; Mele this volume). In our contribution to this volume we offer an alternative theory of intention, on which it is not a propositional attitude at all but rather a distinct kind of mental imagery. For the purpose of our argument, we can provisionally define a mental image as a quasi-perceptual representation that occurs in the absence of the corresponding stimuli. Such imagery need not be conscious; it can also be unconscious. It may manifest in one or more perceptual modalities (Nanay 2017). The main difference that we wish to mark is that mental imagery has a quasi-perceptual format rather than a quasi-linguistic or propositional one. That idea will be developed in more detail in Sections 1 and 2. Our account is inspired by work in the perceptual decision making literature, where decision is modelled as a process of evidence accumulation under conditions of uncertainty and noise. In the paradigms that are central to this","PeriodicalId":333678,"journal":{"name":"Free Will, Causality, and Neuroscience","volume":"15 7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Free Will, Causality, and Neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004409965_003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The standard view in the philosophy of action is the Causal Theory of Action (cta).1 On this view, a behavioural item counts as an intentional action if and only if it is caused by the appropriate sorts of mental states in the right kind of way. On most popular contemporary accounts (e.g. Searle 1983; Bratman 1987; Mele 1992; Pacherie 2008), the appropriate sort of mental state is an intention, with the intention construed as an attitude towards a proposition. The “right kind of way” is thought to be one in which the content of the intention propagates from an abstract level of description (e.g. the intention to investigate a noise) through to more fine-grained specifications that give a bodily movement a rational structure at the moment of bodily movement (e.g. the intention to switch on this light), and finally culminating in motor commands required to execute the right bodily movements. These levels of abstraction respectively correspond to so-called distal intention, proximal intention, and motor intention. These three kinds of intention have distinct roles in the overall dynamics of intentional action (Pacherie 2008; Mele this volume). In our contribution to this volume we offer an alternative theory of intention, on which it is not a propositional attitude at all but rather a distinct kind of mental imagery. For the purpose of our argument, we can provisionally define a mental image as a quasi-perceptual representation that occurs in the absence of the corresponding stimuli. Such imagery need not be conscious; it can also be unconscious. It may manifest in one or more perceptual modalities (Nanay 2017). The main difference that we wish to mark is that mental imagery has a quasi-perceptual format rather than a quasi-linguistic or propositional one. That idea will be developed in more detail in Sections 1 and 2. Our account is inspired by work in the perceptual decision making literature, where decision is modelled as a process of evidence accumulation under conditions of uncertainty and noise. In the paradigms that are central to this
知觉决策及超越:作为心理意象的意图
行动哲学的标准观点是行动的因果论(cta)根据这一观点,当且仅当行为项目是由适当的心理状态以正确的方式引起时,才算有意行为。根据当代最流行的说法(例如Searle 1983;结束1987;Mele 1992;Pacherie 2008),适当的精神状态是一种意图,意图被解释为对命题的态度。“正确的方式”被认为是这样一种方式,意图的内容从抽象的描述层面(例如,调查噪音的意图)传播到更细粒度的规范,在身体运动的时刻给身体运动一个合理的结构(例如,打开灯的意图),最终在执行正确身体运动所需的运动命令中达到高潮。这些抽象层次分别对应于所谓的远端意图、近端意图和运动意图。这三种意向在意向行为的整体动态中具有不同的作用(Pacherie 2008;(这本书)。在我们对这本书的贡献中,我们提供了另一种意图理论,在这种理论上,它根本不是命题态度,而是一种独特的心理意象。为了我们论证的目的,我们可以暂时将心理图像定义为在没有相应刺激的情况下发生的准知觉表征。这种意象不必是有意识的;它也可能是无意识的。它可能表现为一种或多种感知方式(Nanay 2017)。我们希望指出的主要区别是,心理意象具有准感性格式,而不是准语言或命题格式。这个想法将在第1节和第2节中得到更详细的阐述。我们的描述受到感性决策文献工作的启发,在感性决策文献中,决策被建模为在不确定性和噪声条件下积累证据的过程。在这个问题的核心范式中
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信