我们是天生发光的吗?

IF 1.8 1区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY
MIND Pub Date : 2025-03-04 DOI:10.1093/mind/fzaf005
Juan S Piñeros Glasscock
{"title":"我们是天生发光的吗?","authors":"Juan S Piñeros Glasscock","doi":"10.1093/mind/fzaf005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In Piñeros Glasscock (2020) I presented a version of Williamson’s anti-luminosity argument against the Anscombean thesis that intentional action entails knowledge. I defend this argument from recent criticisms by Beddor and Pavese (2022) and Valaris (2021). I argue that contrary to what my past self and these critics suggest, the conclusion of this anti-luminosity argument does not rest on the existence of essentially intentional actions. The argument can be recast based on the humbler premise that agential cognition must represent actions as intentional. I show that this claim is well motivated by precisely the considerations of control behind the objections.","PeriodicalId":48124,"journal":{"name":"MIND","volume":"40 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Are we agentially luminous?\",\"authors\":\"Juan S Piñeros Glasscock\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/mind/fzaf005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In Piñeros Glasscock (2020) I presented a version of Williamson’s anti-luminosity argument against the Anscombean thesis that intentional action entails knowledge. I defend this argument from recent criticisms by Beddor and Pavese (2022) and Valaris (2021). I argue that contrary to what my past self and these critics suggest, the conclusion of this anti-luminosity argument does not rest on the existence of essentially intentional actions. The argument can be recast based on the humbler premise that agential cognition must represent actions as intentional. I show that this claim is well motivated by precisely the considerations of control behind the objections.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48124,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"MIND\",\"volume\":\"40 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"MIND\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/fzaf005\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MIND","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/fzaf005","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在Piñeros Glasscock(2020)中,我提出了威廉姆森的反光度论点的一个版本,该论点反对安斯科宾的论点,即有意行为需要知识。我对Beddor和Pavese(2022)以及Valaris(2021)最近的批评进行了辩护。我认为,与我过去的自我和这些批评家所暗示的相反,这种反光性论点的结论并不依赖于本质上有意行为的存在。这个论点可以基于一个更谦虚的前提来重新定义,即代理认知必须将行为表现为有意的。我指出,这一主张的动机恰恰是反对意见背后对控制的考虑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Are we agentially luminous?
In Piñeros Glasscock (2020) I presented a version of Williamson’s anti-luminosity argument against the Anscombean thesis that intentional action entails knowledge. I defend this argument from recent criticisms by Beddor and Pavese (2022) and Valaris (2021). I argue that contrary to what my past self and these critics suggest, the conclusion of this anti-luminosity argument does not rest on the existence of essentially intentional actions. The argument can be recast based on the humbler premise that agential cognition must represent actions as intentional. I show that this claim is well motivated by precisely the considerations of control behind the objections.
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
MIND
MIND PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
5.60%
发文量
47
期刊介绍: Mind has long been a leading journal in philosophy. For well over 100 years it has presented the best of cutting edge thought from epistemology, metaphysics, philosophy of language, philosophy of logic, and philosophy of mind. Mind continues its tradition of excellence today. Mind has always enjoyed a strong reputation for the high standards established by its editors and receives around 350 submissions each year. The editor seeks advice from a large number of expert referees, including members of the network of Associate Editors and his international advisers. Mind is published quarterly.
×
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