知道该怎么做

Noûs Pub Date : 2024-05-08 DOI:10.1111/nous.12503
Ethan Jerzak, Alexander W. Kocurek
{"title":"知道该怎么做","authors":"Ethan Jerzak, Alexander W. Kocurek","doi":"10.1111/nous.12503","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Much has been written on whether practical knowledge (knowledge‐how) reduces to propositional knowledge (knowledge‐that). Less attention has been paid to what we call deliberative knowledge (knowledge‐to), i.e., knowledge ascriptions embedding other infinitival questions, like <jats:italic>where to meet</jats:italic>, <jats:italic>when to leave</jats:italic>, and <jats:italic>what to bring</jats:italic>. We offer an analysis of knowledge‐to and argue on its basis that, regardless of whether knowledge‐how reduces to knowledge‐that, no such reduction of knowledge‐to is forthcoming. Knowledge‐to, unlike knowledge‐that and knowledge‐how, requires the agent to have formed certain conditional intentions. We discuss the philosophical implications for knowledge‐how, deliberative questions, and virtue.","PeriodicalId":501006,"journal":{"name":"Noûs","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Knowing what to do\",\"authors\":\"Ethan Jerzak, Alexander W. Kocurek\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/nous.12503\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Much has been written on whether practical knowledge (knowledge‐how) reduces to propositional knowledge (knowledge‐that). Less attention has been paid to what we call deliberative knowledge (knowledge‐to), i.e., knowledge ascriptions embedding other infinitival questions, like <jats:italic>where to meet</jats:italic>, <jats:italic>when to leave</jats:italic>, and <jats:italic>what to bring</jats:italic>. We offer an analysis of knowledge‐to and argue on its basis that, regardless of whether knowledge‐how reduces to knowledge‐that, no such reduction of knowledge‐to is forthcoming. Knowledge‐to, unlike knowledge‐that and knowledge‐how, requires the agent to have formed certain conditional intentions. We discuss the philosophical implications for knowledge‐how, deliberative questions, and virtue.\",\"PeriodicalId\":501006,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Noûs\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Noûs\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/nous.12503\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Noûs","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/nous.12503","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

关于实践知识("如何 "知识)是否可以还原为命题知识("是什么 "知识),已有很多论述。对于我们所说的商议性知识(knowledge-to),即包含其他无穷问题的知识描述,如在哪里见面、什么时候离开、带什么东西等,关注较少。我们对 "知识到"(knowledge-to)进行了分析,并在此基础上指出,无论 "知识-如何"(knowledge-how)是否还原为 "知识-是"(knowledge-that),"知识-到"(knowledge-to)都无法还原。与 "知识-那 "和 "知识-如何 "不同,"知识-到 "要求行为主体形成一定的条件意图。我们讨论了 "知识-how"、慎思问题和美德的哲学意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Knowing what to do
Much has been written on whether practical knowledge (knowledge‐how) reduces to propositional knowledge (knowledge‐that). Less attention has been paid to what we call deliberative knowledge (knowledge‐to), i.e., knowledge ascriptions embedding other infinitival questions, like where to meet, when to leave, and what to bring. We offer an analysis of knowledge‐to and argue on its basis that, regardless of whether knowledge‐how reduces to knowledge‐that, no such reduction of knowledge‐to is forthcoming. Knowledge‐to, unlike knowledge‐that and knowledge‐how, requires the agent to have formed certain conditional intentions. We discuss the philosophical implications for knowledge‐how, deliberative questions, and virtue.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信