Autonomy, enactivism, and psychopathy

IF 0.9 3区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY Philosophical Explorations Pub Date : 2021-06-06 DOI:10.1080/13869795.2021.1937680
M. Maiese
{"title":"Autonomy, enactivism, and psychopathy","authors":"M. Maiese","doi":"10.1080/13869795.2021.1937680","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Most philosophical discussions of psychopathy have centered around its significance in relation to empathy, moral cognition, or moral responsibility. However, related questions about the extent to which psychopaths are capable of exercising autonomous agency have remained underexplored. Two central conditions for autonomous agency that are highlighted by many existing accounts include (1) reasons-responsivity, and (2) authenticity. However, available evidence indicates that psychopaths are inadequately responsive to reasons in general and other-regarding reasons in particular, and also seem to lack a set of enduring concerns that might reveal which desires and attitudes are truly theirs. This leads them to behave impulsivity and to disregard the interests and concerns of others. Drawing from the enactivist approach in philosophy of mind and the notions of habit and affordance, I argue that both their prudential deficits and apparent moral failings are rooted, at a deeper level, in a lack of well-developed affective framing patterns and a corresponding disruption to selective attention.","PeriodicalId":46014,"journal":{"name":"Philosophical Explorations","volume":"25 1","pages":"19 - 41"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/13869795.2021.1937680","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophical Explorations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13869795.2021.1937680","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

ABSTRACT Most philosophical discussions of psychopathy have centered around its significance in relation to empathy, moral cognition, or moral responsibility. However, related questions about the extent to which psychopaths are capable of exercising autonomous agency have remained underexplored. Two central conditions for autonomous agency that are highlighted by many existing accounts include (1) reasons-responsivity, and (2) authenticity. However, available evidence indicates that psychopaths are inadequately responsive to reasons in general and other-regarding reasons in particular, and also seem to lack a set of enduring concerns that might reveal which desires and attitudes are truly theirs. This leads them to behave impulsivity and to disregard the interests and concerns of others. Drawing from the enactivist approach in philosophy of mind and the notions of habit and affordance, I argue that both their prudential deficits and apparent moral failings are rooted, at a deeper level, in a lack of well-developed affective framing patterns and a corresponding disruption to selective attention.
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
自主性、积极性和精神病
大多数关于精神病的哲学讨论都围绕着它在共情、道德认知或道德责任方面的重要性。然而,有关精神病患者能够行使自主代理的程度的相关问题仍未得到充分探讨。许多现有账户强调的自治机构的两个核心条件包括:(1)原因-响应性,以及(2)真实性。然而,现有的证据表明,精神病患者对一般的原因,特别是与他人有关的原因反应不足,而且似乎也缺乏一套持久的关注,这些关注可能会揭示哪些欲望和态度真正属于他们。这导致他们的行为冲动,无视他人的利益和关切。从心理哲学的激进主义方法以及习惯和能力的概念出发,我认为,他们的审慎缺陷和明显的道德缺陷,在更深层次上都植根于缺乏发达的情感框架模式和相应的选择性注意的中断。
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
1.20
自引率
16.70%
发文量
29
期刊最新文献
See what I didn’t do there? Mental illness, exemption & moral exclusion: the role of interpretative generosity Let’s not get ahead of ourselves: we have no idea if moral reasoning causes moral progress Bringing transparency to the de se debates Life and meaning
×
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