Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
STANDARD COMPATIBILIST ACCOUNTS Standard compatibilist accounts typically don’t make space for an act of choice; and it is hard to see how they could. Desire based accounts The objects, means, &c are the weights, the man is the scale, the understanding of a convenience or inconvenience is the pressure ofthose weights, which incline himnow one way, now another; and that inclination is the will. (Hobbes, Collected English Works Vol. V p. 326.) Belief (or reason) based accounts (i) deliberation: considering the options that are available, and their likely consequences; getting clear on one’s own desires, and one’s own prior plans and intentions; seeing how the options fit in with these desires and plans; establishing pros and cons. (ii) deciding that: making a judgment that a certain action is best, given the considerations raised in
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: the process of deliberation. The upshot of the judgment is a belief. (iii) deciding to: deciding to do the action that one judged was best. The upshot of this decision is an intention. (iv) acting: acting on the intention that has been made, which involves both doing that thing, and coordinating other actions and intentions around it. On internalist accounts, (iii) collapses into (ii); but then there no real place for choice. On externalist accounts the two remain distinct, but then choice becomes a liability. Indeed, this isn’t just a problem for standard belief based compatibilist accounts; it is a problem for anyone who advocates a substantial role for choice to explain why we might need and value it....
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Ask a homework question - tutors are online