Deliberation and Rival Accounts of Free Choice in Medieval Philosophy

Q3 Arts and Humanities
T. Hoffmann
{"title":"Deliberation and Rival Accounts of Free Choice in Medieval Philosophy","authors":"T. Hoffmann","doi":"10.5406/21521026.40.2.03","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Later medieval theories of free choice differ fundamentally as to the importance they assign to deliberation. Some thinkers hold that the will's choices necessarily agree with the intellect's judgment, obtained by deliberation, of what is most worth choosing in a particular circumstance. They thus think that deliberation provides the object of choice. In addition, they take the control that is essential to free choice to be rooted in deliberation. Others object that deliberation cannot ground free choice since it is itself not originally in our control. They think that one can choose differently from what appears most choiceworthy upon deliberation, and so they deny that the object of choice is exclusively given by deliberation. This paper considers theories of the role of deliberation in free choice held by prominent thirteenth and early fourteenth-century thinkers. It will be shown that there are significant theoretical difficulties on both sides.","PeriodicalId":53558,"journal":{"name":"History of Philosophy Quarterly","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"History of Philosophy Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5406/21521026.40.2.03","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Later medieval theories of free choice differ fundamentally as to the importance they assign to deliberation. Some thinkers hold that the will's choices necessarily agree with the intellect's judgment, obtained by deliberation, of what is most worth choosing in a particular circumstance. They thus think that deliberation provides the object of choice. In addition, they take the control that is essential to free choice to be rooted in deliberation. Others object that deliberation cannot ground free choice since it is itself not originally in our control. They think that one can choose differently from what appears most choiceworthy upon deliberation, and so they deny that the object of choice is exclusively given by deliberation. This paper considers theories of the role of deliberation in free choice held by prominent thirteenth and early fourteenth-century thinkers. It will be shown that there are significant theoretical difficulties on both sides.
中世纪哲学中自由选择的深思熟虑与对立说法
中世纪后期关于自由选择的理论在赋予审议的重要性方面有着根本的不同。一些思想家认为,意志的选择必然与理智的判断相一致,这种判断是通过深思熟虑得出的,即在特定情况下什么是最值得选择的。因此,他们认为深思熟虑提供了选择的对象。此外,他们把对自由选择至关重要的控制根植于深思熟虑。另一些人则反对说,深思熟虑不能作为自由选择的基础,因为它本身本来就不在我们的控制之中。他们认为,一个人可以做出不同于经过深思熟虑后看来最值得选择的选择,因此,他们否认选择的对象完全是经过深思熟虑而给予的。本文考虑了13世纪和14世纪早期著名思想家关于自由选择中审议作用的理论。这将表明,双方都有重大的理论困难。
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
History of Philosophy Quarterly
History of Philosophy Quarterly Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
0.40
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信