Skip to main content
×
×
Home
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 7
  • Cited by
    This (lowercase (translateProductType product.productType)) has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Pérez Carballo, Alejandro 2018. Rationality & Second-Order Preferences. Noûs, Vol. 52, Issue. 1, p. 196.

    Sylvan, Kurt 2018. Veritism Unswamped. Mind, Vol. 127, Issue. 506, p. 381.

    Stanovich, Keith E. 2013. Why humans are (sometimes) less rational than other animals: Cognitive complexity and the axioms of rational choice. Thinking & Reasoning, Vol. 19, Issue. 1, p. 1.

    Bruckner, Donald W. 2009. Silent prudence. Philosophical Explorations, Vol. 12, Issue. 3, p. 349.

    Viens, A. M. 2007. Addiction, Responsibility and Moral Psychology. The American Journal of Bioethics, Vol. 7, Issue. 1, p. 17.

    Harman, Gilbert 2006. SELF-REFLEXIVE THOUGHTS. Philosophical Issues, Vol. 16, Issue. 1, p. 334.

    Roughley, Neil 2002. The Uses of Hierarchy: Autonomy and Valuing. Philosophical Explorations, Vol. 5, Issue. 3, p. 167.

    ×
  • Print publication year: 1993
  • Online publication date: December 2009

8 - Desired desires

Summary

A number of philosophers have appealed to “second-order desires” (desires about desires) in order to explain basic moral notions. Harry Frankfurt has suggested that freedom of the will might be identified with the ability to satisfy a certain sort of second-order desire and Richard Jeffrey has made a similar proposal. Gary Watson has objected that the resulting account of freedom of the will does not work and that the appeals made to second-order desires should be replaced with references to what an agent values.

Watson's view can be reconciled with Frankfurt's if valuing is identified with a kind of second-order desire. David Lewis has offered such an identification and David Copp has recently suggested that we might identify a person's values with preferences for which the person has a certain second-order preference.

However, these appeals to second-order desires in order to explain freedom of the will, valuing, or values are all unsuccessful.

In arguing for this negative conclusion, I defend a number of subsidiary points: (1) Positive intentions are reflexive or self-referential. (2) Intrinsic desires are not just noninstrumental desires. (3) To value something is in part to want it. (4) There is sometimes a difference between believing that something is good and valuing it. (5) There is a difference between valuing something and having it as one of your values.

Frankfurt on freedom of the will

Frankfurt motivates his view by criticizing Strawson's account of the concept of a person.

Recommend this book

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this book to your organisation's collection.

Value, Welfare, and Morality
  • Online ISBN: 9780511625022
  • Book DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511625022
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to *
×