Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-684899dbb8-mhx7p Total loading time: 0.413 Render date: 2022-05-27T23:20:17.309Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true }
  • English
Behavioral and Brain Sciences Behavioral and Brain Sciences

Article contents

“Defeaters” don't matter

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2018

Zina B. Ward  and
Edouard Machery
Zina B. Ward
Affiliation:
Department of History and Philosophy of Science, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15260zina.b.ward@pitt.eduhttp://zinabward.com
Edouard Machery
Affiliation:
Department of History and Philosophy of Science and the Center for Philosophy of Science, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15260. machery@pitt.eduwww.edouardmachery.com
Get access Rights & Permissions[Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We argue that the exercise of agency is compatible with the presence of what Doris calls “defeaters.” In order to undermine reflectivist theories of agency and support his valuational alternative, Doris must not simply show that defeaters exist but rather establish that some agentive behaviors do express a person's values without involving reflection.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 41 , 2018 , e63
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anscombe, G. E. M. (1957) Intention. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Arpaly, N. & Schroeder, T. (2012) Deliberation and acting for reasons. Philosophical Review 121(2):209–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Back, M. D., Schmukle, S. C. & Egloff, B. (2009) Predicting actual behavior from the explicit and implicit self-concept of personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 97(3):533.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bushman, B. J., DeWall, C. N., Pond, R. S. & Hanus, M. D. (2014) Low glucose relates to greater aggression in married couples. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 111(17):6254–57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cherlin, A. J., Furstenberg, F. F., Chase-Lansdale, L., Kiernan, K. E., Robins, P. K., Morrison, D. R. & Teitler, J. O. (1991) Longitudinal studies of effects of divorce on children in Great Britain and the United States. Science 252(5011):1386–89.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Doris, J. M. (2015b). Talking to our selves: Reflection, ignorance, and agency. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardner, M. P. (1985) Mood states and consumer behavior: A critical review. Journal of Consumer Research 12(3):281–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hogarth, R. M. & Einhorn, H. J. (1992) Order effects in belief updating: The belief-adjustment model. Cognitive Psychology 24(1):1–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krosnick, J. A., Miller, J. M. & Tichy, M. P. (2004) An unrecognized need for ballot reform: Effects of candidate name order. In: Rethinking the vote: The politics and prospects of American election reform, ed. Crigler, A. N., Just, M. R. & McCaffery, E. J., pp. 51–74. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nisbett, R. E., Peng, K., Choi, I. & Norenzayan, A. (2001) Culture and systems of thought: Holistic versus analytic cognition. Psychological Review 108(2):291–310. doi: 10.1037//0033-295X.108.2.291.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Northover, S. B., Pedersen, W. C., Cohen, A. B. & Andrews, P. W. (2017) Artificial surveillance cues do not increase generosity: Two meta-analyses. Evolution and Human Behavior 38(1):144–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Railton, P. (2006) How to engage reason: The problem of regress. In: Reason and value: Themes from the moral philosophy of Joseph Raz, ed. Wallace, R. J., Pettit, P., Scheffler, S. & Smith, M., pp. 176–201. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Railton, P. (2009) Practical competence and fluent agency. In: Reasons for action, ed. Sobel, D. & Wall, S., pp. 81–115. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raz, J. (1999) Engaging reason: On the theory of value and action. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wu, W. (2014) Attention. Routledge.Google ScholarPubMed

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

“Defeaters” don't matter
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

“Defeaters” don't matter
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

“Defeaters” don't matter
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *