Hobbes on the Cause of Action: How to Rethink Practical Reasoning

IF 0.1 0 PHILOSOPHY Hobbes Studies Pub Date : 2023-09-28 DOI:10.1163/18750257-bja10064
Martine Pécharman
{"title":"Hobbes on the Cause of Action: How to Rethink Practical Reasoning","authors":"Martine Pécharman","doi":"10.1163/18750257-bja10064","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In the free-will discussion between Hobbes and Bramhall, Hobbes’s principle that actions are necessary is not immediately action-theoretic. The fundamental theoretical context of Hobbes’s explanation of action lies in an understanding of causation more generally. However, Hobbes’s action theory is not simply modeled after the account of cause and effect in his First Philosophy. It introduces a temporal qualification which ranks necessitarianism higher than First Philosophy does: not only a voluntary action, but also the determinate moment when the mental act of volition is formed, is necessitated. My paper argues that this strengthening of causal necessity is due to the Hobbesian scheme of deliberation, which must be analyzed in terms of one distinctive kind of ‘mental discourse’ and practical reasoning, not merely in terms of a series of passions. For Hobbes, the impossibility of a direct representation of the future requires the mediation of a mental construction.","PeriodicalId":42474,"journal":{"name":"Hobbes Studies","volume":"239 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hobbes Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18750257-bja10064","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract In the free-will discussion between Hobbes and Bramhall, Hobbes’s principle that actions are necessary is not immediately action-theoretic. The fundamental theoretical context of Hobbes’s explanation of action lies in an understanding of causation more generally. However, Hobbes’s action theory is not simply modeled after the account of cause and effect in his First Philosophy. It introduces a temporal qualification which ranks necessitarianism higher than First Philosophy does: not only a voluntary action, but also the determinate moment when the mental act of volition is formed, is necessitated. My paper argues that this strengthening of causal necessity is due to the Hobbesian scheme of deliberation, which must be analyzed in terms of one distinctive kind of ‘mental discourse’ and practical reasoning, not merely in terms of a series of passions. For Hobbes, the impossibility of a direct representation of the future requires the mediation of a mental construction.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
霍布斯论行为的原因:如何重新思考实践推理
在霍布斯与布拉姆霍尔关于自由意志的讨论中,霍布斯的“行动是必要的”原则并不是直接的行动理论。霍布斯对行为解释的基本理论背景在于对更普遍的因果关系的理解。然而,霍布斯的行动理论并不是简单地模仿他的《第一哲学》中的因果关系。它所提出的一种时间上的限定,比第一哲学所提出的必然主义的限定要高得多,因为它不仅规定了一种自愿的行为,而且规定了意志的精神行为形成的那一环节,都是必然的。我的论文认为,这种因果必然性的强化是由于霍布斯的审议方案,它必须根据一种独特的“精神话语”和实践推理来分析,而不仅仅是根据一系列的激情。对霍布斯来说,直接表征未来的不可能性需要心理建构的中介。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Hobbes Studies
Hobbes Studies PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
33.30%
发文量
16
期刊介绍: Hobbes Studies is an international peer reviewed scholarly journal. Its interests are twofold; first, in publishing research about the philosophical, political, historical, literary, and scientific matters related to Thomas Hobbes"s own thought, at the beginning of the modern state and the rise of science, and also in a comparison of his views to other important thinkers; second, because of Hobbes"s enduring influence in stimulating social and political theory, the journal is interested in publishing such discussions. Articles and occasional book reviews are peer reviewed. The International Hobbes Association is associated with the journal but submissions are open.
期刊最新文献
Archibald Campbell, Critic of Hobbes Transubstantiation, Absurdity, and the Religious Imagination: Hobbes and Rational Christianity Hobbes, Locke, and the Christian Commonwealth Hobbes and Locke: Meaning, Method, Modernity: Introduction A Note from the Editor
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1