首页> 外文期刊>Philosophical Studies >Motivational Cognitivism and the Argument from Direction of Fit
【24h】

Motivational Cognitivism and the Argument from Direction of Fit

机译:动机认知主义与适度取向的争论

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

An important argument for the belief-desire thesis is based on the idea that an agent can be motivated to act only if her mental states include one which aims at changing the world, that is, one with a “world-to-mind”, or “telic”, direction of fit. Some cognitivists accept this claim, but argue that some beliefs, notably moral ones, have not only a “mind-to-world”, or “thetic”, direction of fit, but also a telic one. The paper first argues that this cognitivist reply is deficient, for only the “dominant” direction of fit of an attitude is responsible for its character and function. Further, it seems that the dominant direction of fit of an attitude is determined by its psychological mode, and so all beliefs seem to have a dominant thetic direction of fit, and to be motivationally inert. The main part of this paper, however, is devoted to explaining how it is that attitudes, like moral attitudes, can truly have two directions of fit in a way which enables them to be both cognitive and motivational. Reflection on the nature of beliefs suggests that the claim that the dominant direction of fit of an attitude is determined by its psychological mode should be qualified. The reasons beliefs provide draw their authority for the agent – their demanding nature – from the objects represented by these beliefs, and so, it is the beliefs’ content which determine their dominant direction of fit, as far as their role in practical reasoning is concerned. Thus, in the sense relevant to practical reasoning a belief with a normative content does have a dominant telic direction of fit. At the same time, in the sense relevant to its satisfaction conditions a moral belief has a dominant thetic direction of fit, which underlies its classification as a cognitive attitude. Cognitivists, then, can have it both ways.
机译:信念-渴望论的一个重要论点是基于这样一个思想,即只有当代理人的心理状态包括旨在改变世界的心理状态,即具有“从世界到头脑”的状态时,才可以激励其采取行动。或“ telic”,适合的方向。一些认知学家接受了这种主张,但认为某些信念,尤其是道德信念,不仅具有“贴近世界”或“主题”的适应方向,而且还具有提倡的方向。该论文首先认为,这种认知主义的回答是有缺陷的,因为态度的“主要”适应方向是其态度和功能的原因。此外,似乎一种姿势的主要适应方向是由其心理模式决定的,因此所有信念似乎都具有一种主要的适应性主题方向,并且在动机上是惰性的。但是,本文的主要部分致力于说明态度如何像道德态度一样,能够真正具有两个适合的方向,从而使它们既具有认知能力又具有激励性。对信念本质的反思表明,关于一种态度的主要适应方向是由其心理模式决定的主张应该是合格的。信念提供原因的原因是代理从这些信念所代表的对象中获取了代理的权力-他们的苛刻性质,因此,就其在实际推理中的作用而言,信念的内容决定了它们的主要适应方向。 。因此,在与实践推理相关的意义上,具有规范性内容的信念确实具有主导的适应性方向。同时,在与满足条件相关的意义上,道德信仰具有占主导地位的主题适应性方向,这将其归类为认知态度。那么,认知主义者可以同时做到。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Philosophical Studies》 |2006年第3期|561-580|共20页
  • 作者

    Hilla Jacobson-Horowitz;

  • 作者单位

    Ben-Gurion University, P.O. Box 653, Beer Sheva, Israel;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号