Collectivism on the horizon: A challenge to Pettit's critique of collectivism

Paprzycka, Katarzyna

doi:10.1080/00048409812348331

Cited by 7 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…According to one view (explanatory individualism), every action must be done because of the agent's desire. The opponents (Baier ; Fleming ; von Wright ; Paprzycka 1998; 2002) bring to attention various kinds of actions performed not because of our own but because of others’ desires. Consider an example.…”

Section: Neg‐raising and Enthymematicity Of Action Explanationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

On a Neg‐Raising Fallacy in Determining Enthymematicity: If She Did not Believe or Want …

Paprzycka

2014

Metaphilosophy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many arguments that show p to be enthymematic (in an argument for q) rely on claims like “if one did not believe that p, one would not have a reason for believing that q.” Such arguments are susceptible to the neg‐raising fallacy. We tend to interpret claims like “X does not believe that p” as statements of disbelief (X's belief that not‐p) rather than as statements of withholding the belief that p. This article argues that there is a tendency to equivocate in arguments for the enthymematicity of arguments (e.g., Lewis Carroll's paradox, Hume's problem) as well as in arguments for the enthymematicity of action explanations (e.g., arguments for psychologism and for explanatory individualism). The article concludes with a warning, because the equivocation is often helpful in teaching and because neg‐raising verbs include philosophically vital verbs: desire, want, intend, think, suppose, imagine, expect, feel, seem, appear.

show abstract

Section: Neg‐raising and Enthymematicity Of Action Explanationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

On a Neg‐Raising Fallacy in Determining Enthymematicity: If She Did not Believe or Want …

Paprzycka

2014

Metaphilosophy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…t8 For instance, the contrasting positions of Chisholm and Sellars (in their famous "Correspondence on Intentionality" (Sellars and Chisholm 1958)) both satisfy the constraint. 26 The"non-individualistic/anti-individualistic" terminology follows Katarzyna Paprzycka's discussion of a similar taxonomy of behavioral explanations (Paprzycka 1998). I will not discuss this possibility here, though (as will be discussed in the next section) theories which ostensibly have such a goal usually turn out to be belief-theoretic, since, to account for jokes, lies, etc, the individual's language is usually taken simply to be evidence for the thoughts behind it.…”

Section: Hjackman@yorkucamentioning

confidence: 99%

Experession, thought and language

Jackman

2003

Philosophia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In particular, I believe that a full theory of agency should accommodate the picture of the two types of commitments (§4). Both types of commitments are relevant to agency, though mainstream philosophical action theory has been almost exclusively focused on the first type (for a critique, see Paprzycka, , , ; Schmid, , ). From this perspective, the Knobe effect is a manifestation of the fact that the concept of action is, at roots, a social and normative concept.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Omissions Account of the Knobe Effect and the Asymmetry Challenge

Paprzycka

2015

Mind & Language

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The characteristic asymmetry in intentionality attributions that is known as the Knobe effect can be explained by conjoining an orthodox theory of intentional action with a normative account of intentional omission. On the latter view: (a) omissions presuppose some normative context; (b) there are good reasons why the intentionality of omissions requires agents' knowledge rather than intention. The asymmetry in intentionality attributions in Knobe's cases can be seen to be derivative from an asymmetry in intentional omissions. The omissions account further explains the Butler problem and some related puzzles. It also safeguards the simple view of intentional action from the asymmetry challenge.

show abstract

Collectivism on the horizon: A challenge to Pettit's critique of collectivism

Cited by 7 publications

References 8 publications

On a Neg‐Raising Fallacy in Determining Enthymematicity: If She Did not Believe or Want …

On a Neg‐Raising Fallacy in Determining Enthymematicity: If She Did not Believe or Want …

Experession, thought and language

The Omissions Account of the Knobe Effect and the Asymmetry Challenge

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About