论一般能力与非一般能力

IF 0.7 2区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY
S. Kittle
{"title":"论一般能力与非一般能力","authors":"S. Kittle","doi":"10.1111/papq.12424","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":": I distinguish two ways an ability might be general: (i) an ability might be general in that its possession doesn ’ t entail the possession of an opportunity; (ii) an ability might be general in virtue of pertaining to a wide range of circumstances. I argue that these two types of generality – I refer to them with the terms ‘ general ’ and ‘ generic ’ , respectively – produce twoorthogonal distinctions among abilities. I show that the two types of generality are sometimes run together by those writing on free will and argue that both types of generality are relevant to understanding the modality of abilities.","PeriodicalId":47097,"journal":{"name":"PACIFIC PHILOSOPHICAL QUARTERLY","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On General and Non‐General Abilities\",\"authors\":\"S. Kittle\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/papq.12424\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\": I distinguish two ways an ability might be general: (i) an ability might be general in that its possession doesn ’ t entail the possession of an opportunity; (ii) an ability might be general in virtue of pertaining to a wide range of circumstances. I argue that these two types of generality – I refer to them with the terms ‘ general ’ and ‘ generic ’ , respectively – produce twoorthogonal distinctions among abilities. I show that the two types of generality are sometimes run together by those writing on free will and argue that both types of generality are relevant to understanding the modality of abilities.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47097,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PACIFIC PHILOSOPHICAL QUARTERLY\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PACIFIC PHILOSOPHICAL QUARTERLY\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/papq.12424\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"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":"PACIFIC PHILOSOPHICAL QUARTERLY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/papq.12424","RegionNum":2,"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

:我从两个方面区分了一种能力可能是一般的:(I)一种能力可以是一般的,因为它的拥有并不意味着拥有机会;(ii)由于涉及广泛的情况,某项能力可能是一般性的。我认为这两种类型的通用性——我分别用“通用”和“通用”来称呼它们——在能力之间产生了两种正交的区别。我表明,这两种类型的普遍性有时会被那些以自由意志写作的人结合在一起,并认为这两种普遍性都与理解能力的形式有关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
On General and Non‐General Abilities
: I distinguish two ways an ability might be general: (i) an ability might be general in that its possession doesn ’ t entail the possession of an opportunity; (ii) an ability might be general in virtue of pertaining to a wide range of circumstances. I argue that these two types of generality – I refer to them with the terms ‘ general ’ and ‘ generic ’ , respectively – produce twoorthogonal distinctions among abilities. I show that the two types of generality are sometimes run together by those writing on free will and argue that both types of generality are relevant to understanding the modality of abilities.
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
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: Pacific Philosophical Quarterly is a journal of general philosophy in the analytic tradition, publishing original articles from all areas of philosophy including metaphysics, epistemology, moral philosophy, political philosophy, philosophy of language, philosophy of mind, aesthetics and history of philosophy. Periodically, Pacific Philosophical Quarterly publishes special editions devoted to the investigation of important topics in a particular field.
×
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