代理意识不支持反还原论的行动理论

IF 0.2 4区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY Kriterion-Revista de Filosofia Pub Date : 2021-10-22 DOI:10.1590/0100-512X2021N14905BSM
Beatriz Sorrentino Marques
{"title":"代理意识不支持反还原论的行动理论","authors":"Beatriz Sorrentino Marques","doi":"10.1590/0100-512X2021N14905BSM","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Anti-reductionist Theories of Action are, in general, accounts of action according to which the role the agent plays in the production of her action cannot be reduced to her mental events or states. Proponents of these theories present claims according to which Anti-reductionist Theories of Action better capture the sense of agency that agents experience when performing intentional actions than the competing Causal Theory of Action. I will investigate the arguments supporting these claims and argue that they do not survive scrutiny, especially when taking into consideration the neuro-cognitive information available about the sense of agency. Anti-reductionist Theories of Action seem incompatible with the empirical account of sense of agency, as show experiments focusing on action selection, the comparator model, and perception of the relation between action and its outcome. Alternatively, the Causal Theory of Action is more able to accommodate and explain the sense of agency.","PeriodicalId":52055,"journal":{"name":"Kriterion-Revista de Filosofia","volume":"7 2","pages":"409-432"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"SENSE OF AGENCY DOES NOT SUPPORT ANTI-REDUCTIONIST THEORIES OF ACTION\",\"authors\":\"Beatriz Sorrentino Marques\",\"doi\":\"10.1590/0100-512X2021N14905BSM\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Anti-reductionist Theories of Action are, in general, accounts of action according to which the role the agent plays in the production of her action cannot be reduced to her mental events or states. Proponents of these theories present claims according to which Anti-reductionist Theories of Action better capture the sense of agency that agents experience when performing intentional actions than the competing Causal Theory of Action. I will investigate the arguments supporting these claims and argue that they do not survive scrutiny, especially when taking into consideration the neuro-cognitive information available about the sense of agency. Anti-reductionist Theories of Action seem incompatible with the empirical account of sense of agency, as show experiments focusing on action selection, the comparator model, and perception of the relation between action and its outcome. Alternatively, the Causal Theory of Action is more able to accommodate and explain the sense of agency.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52055,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Kriterion-Revista de Filosofia\",\"volume\":\"7 2\",\"pages\":\"409-432\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Kriterion-Revista de Filosofia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1590/0100-512X2021N14905BSM\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kriterion-Revista de Filosofia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/0100-512X2021N14905BSM","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

一般来说,反还原论的行为理论是对行为的描述,根据这种理论,行为主体在其行为的产生中所扮演的角色不能被简化为其心理事件或状态。这些理论的支持者提出的主张是,反还原论的行为理论比与之竞争的因果行为理论更能捕捉到行为主体在进行有意行为时所经历的代理感。我将调查支持这些说法的论据,并认为它们经不起推究,特别是考虑到有关代理感的神经认知信息时。反还原论的行动理论似乎与代理意识的经验解释不相容,因为实验集中在行动选择、比较模型和对行动及其结果之间关系的感知上。另外,行为的因果理论更能适应和解释代理感。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
SENSE OF AGENCY DOES NOT SUPPORT ANTI-REDUCTIONIST THEORIES OF ACTION
ABSTRACT Anti-reductionist Theories of Action are, in general, accounts of action according to which the role the agent plays in the production of her action cannot be reduced to her mental events or states. Proponents of these theories present claims according to which Anti-reductionist Theories of Action better capture the sense of agency that agents experience when performing intentional actions than the competing Causal Theory of Action. I will investigate the arguments supporting these claims and argue that they do not survive scrutiny, especially when taking into consideration the neuro-cognitive information available about the sense of agency. Anti-reductionist Theories of Action seem incompatible with the empirical account of sense of agency, as show experiments focusing on action selection, the comparator model, and perception of the relation between action and its outcome. Alternatively, the Causal Theory of Action is more able to accommodate and explain the sense of agency.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
审稿时长
28 weeks
期刊最新文献
KANT, LIBERDADE E A HERMENÊUTICA DO FRACASSO A RELAÇÃO ENTRE A ÁGUA E A LOUCURA EM HISTOIRE DE LA FOLIE REVISITANDO O EXPERIMENTO DE LIBET: CONTRIBUIÇÕES ATUAIS DA NEUROCIÊNCIA PARA O PROBLEMA DO LIVRE-ARBÍTRIO AGAMBEN E FOUCAULT: EXPLORANDO OS LIMITES DESSA APROXIMAÇÃO A PARTIR DO TEMA DO ‘DESTITUINTE’ NAVIGATING THROUGH THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE(S)
×
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