How Does Human Agency Actually Work? On Bratman's ‘Core Capacity Thesis’ and the Relation between Philosophy of Action and the Empirical Sciences

IF 0.7 2区 哲学 Q4 ETHICS Journal of Applied Philosophy Pub Date : 2024-01-23 DOI:10.1111/japp.12710
Jonathan Phillips, David Plunkett
{"title":"How Does Human Agency Actually Work? On Bratman's ‘Core Capacity Thesis’ and the Relation between Philosophy of Action and the Empirical Sciences","authors":"Jonathan Phillips,&nbsp;David Plunkett","doi":"10.1111/japp.12710","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Throughout his career, Michael Bratman has developed a detailed model of individual ‘planning agency’, and, more recently, models of joint action and aspects of social life that he argues such planning agency helps support. How might we empirically investigate whether these models capture what is going on in actual human lives? In this article, we critically engage with this broad question by focusing on what Bratman calls the ‘core capacity thesis’, which is at the center of his most recent discussions of how his work in the philosophy of action hangs together. In his own words, the core capacity thesis claims that ‘our capacity for planning agency plays basic roles in multiple, interrelated systems of human, mind-shaped practical organization, individual and social’. We explore how one might go about testing this thesis, focusing on Bratman's particular way of defending this thesis using the idea of ‘nested Cummins functions’. In so doing, we hope to contribute to a broader discussion about what the relationship is (or, perhaps more importantly, should be) between the kind of philosophy of action Bratman does and empirical work in fields such as psychology, cognitive science, and biology.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":47057,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Philosophy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/japp.12710","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Throughout his career, Michael Bratman has developed a detailed model of individual ‘planning agency’, and, more recently, models of joint action and aspects of social life that he argues such planning agency helps support. How might we empirically investigate whether these models capture what is going on in actual human lives? In this article, we critically engage with this broad question by focusing on what Bratman calls the ‘core capacity thesis’, which is at the center of his most recent discussions of how his work in the philosophy of action hangs together. In his own words, the core capacity thesis claims that ‘our capacity for planning agency plays basic roles in multiple, interrelated systems of human, mind-shaped practical organization, individual and social’. We explore how one might go about testing this thesis, focusing on Bratman's particular way of defending this thesis using the idea of ‘nested Cummins functions’. In so doing, we hope to contribute to a broader discussion about what the relationship is (or, perhaps more importantly, should be) between the kind of philosophy of action Bratman does and empirical work in fields such as psychology, cognitive science, and biology.

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
人类代理究竟是如何运作的?论布拉特曼的 "核心能力论 "以及行动哲学与经验科学的关系
迈克尔-布拉特曼(Michael Bratman)在其职业生涯中建立了一个详细的个人 "规划机构 "模型,最近又建立了联合行动和社会生活模型,他认为这种规划机构有助于支持社会生活的各个方面。我们该如何实证研究这些模型是否捕捉到了人类实际生活中正在发生的事情呢?在本文中,我们将通过关注布拉特曼所谓的 "核心能力论题 "来批判性地探讨这个广泛的问题,该论题是他最近关于如何将其行动哲学研究成果整合在一起的讨论的核心。用他自己的话说,核心能力论声称 "我们的规划代理能力在多个相互关联的人类系统中扮演着基本的角色,这些系统是由心智塑造的个人和社会实践组织而成的"。我们将探讨如何检验这一论点,重点关注布拉特曼利用 "嵌套的康明斯功能 "这一理念为这一论点辩护的特殊方式。在此过程中,我们希望能推动更广泛的讨论,探讨布拉特曼的行动哲学与心理学、认知科学和生物学等领域的实证工作之间的关系是什么(或许更重要的是,应该是什么)。
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
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
71
期刊最新文献
The Story of Romantic Love and Polyamory Is the Gender Pension Gap Fair? AI and Responsibility: No Gap, but Abundance Responsibility Gaps and Technology: Old Wine in New Bottles? Parental Imprisonment and Children's Right Not to be Separated from Their Parents
×
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