Hostname: page-component-54dcc4c588-64p75 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-05T13:22:23.752Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A metaphysics for practical knowledge

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2020

Kim Frost Open the ORCID record for Kim Frost [Opens in a new window]
Kim Frost*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Is Anscombean practical knowledge independent of what the agent actually does on an occasion? Failure to understand Anscombe’s answer to this question is a major obstacle to appreciating the subtlety and plausibility of her view. I argue that Anscombe’s answer is negative, and turns on the nature of mistakes in performance, and reveals a distinctive implicit metaphysics of mind and knowledge, structured by related capacities and exercises of capacities. If my interpretation is correct, then practical knowledge shares features with knowledge-how and knowledge-that, but deserves its own epistemic category.

Keywords

Anscombepractical knowledgemetaphysics of mindaction theoryphilosophy of mindepistemologymetaphysicsmistakes in performanceknowledge howknowledge that

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Canadian Journal of Philosophy , Volume 49 , Issue 3 , May 2019 , pp. 314 - 340
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Anscombe, G. E. M., [1989] 2005. “Practical Inference.” Reprinted. In Human Life, Action and Ethics: Essays by G. E. M. Anscombe, edited by Anscombe, G. E. M., 109–147. Charlottesville, VA: Imprint Academic.Google Scholar
Anscombe, G. E. M., 2000. Intention. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Aristotle. 1993. De Anima: Books II and III. Trans. Hamlyn, D. W.. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Campbell, L., 2017. “An Epistemology for Practical Knowledge.” Canadian Journal of Philosophy. doi:10.1080/00455091.2017.1341073.Google Scholar
Davidson, D., [1978] 2000. “Intending.” Reprinted. In Essays on Actions and Events, edited by Davidson, D., 83–102. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Frey, J., 2018. Action, Practical Knowledge, and the Good. Unpublished manuscript.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frost, K., 2014. “On the Very Idea of Direction of Fit.” Philosophical Review, 123 (4): 429–484. doi:10.1215/00318108-2749720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyman, J., 2015. Action, Knowledge and Will. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marcus, E., 2012. Rational Causation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDowell, J., 2011. “Anscombe on Bodily Self-Knowledge.” In Essays on Anscombe’s Intention, edited by Ford, A., Hornsby, J., and Stoutland, F., 128–146. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
McDowell, J., 2013. “Zum verhältnis von rezeptivem und praktischem wissen.” Deutsche Zeitschrift für Philosophie, 3: 387–401.Google Scholar
Moran, R., 2004. “Anscombe on “Practical Knowledge”.” Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement, 55: 43–68. doi:10.1017/S1358246100008638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Özaltun, E., 2016. “Practical Knowledge of What Happens: A Reading of §45.” Klesis, 35: 52–73.Google Scholar
Paul, S., 2011. “Deviant Formal Causation.” Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy, 5 (3): 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rödl, S., 2007. Self-Consciousness. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Rödl, S., 2011. “Two Forms of Practical Knowledge.” In Essays on Anscombe’s Intention, edited by Ford, A., Hornsby, J., and Stoutland, F., 211–241. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Rödl, S., 2018. Self-Consciousness and Objectivity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Russell, B., 1910–11. “Knowledge by Acquaintance and Knowledge by Description.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 11: 108–128. doi:10.1093/aristotelian/11.1.108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwenkler, J., 2015. “‘Understanding ‘Practical Knowledge”.” Philosopher’s Imprint, 15: 15.Google Scholar
Setiya, K., 2007. Reasons without Rationalism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Setiya, K., 2008. “Practical Knowledge.” Ethics, 118 (3): 388–409. doi:10.1086/528781.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Setiya, K., 2016. “Anscombe on Practical Knowledge.” In Practical Knowledge, edited by Setiya, K., 156–168. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tenenbaum, S., 2009. “Knowing the Good and Knowing What One Is Doing.” Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 39 (sup1): 91–117. doi:10.1080/00455091.2009.10717645.Google Scholar
Thompson, M., 2008. Life and Action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, M., 2011. “Anscombe’s Intention and Practical Knowledge.” In Essays on Anscombe’s Intention, edited by Ford, A., Hornsby, J., and Stoutland, F., 198–210. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Velleman, D., 1989. Practical Reflection. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Williamson, T., 2000. Knowledge and Its Limits. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wiseman, R., 2016. Anscombe’s Intention. London: Routledge.Google Scholar