Skip to main content
We describe and report on results of employing a new method for analyzing lay conceptions of intentional and unintentional action. Instead of asking people for their conceptual intuitions with regard to construed scenarios, we asked our... more
We describe and report on results of employing a new method for analyzing lay conceptions of intentional and unintentional action. Instead of asking people for their conceptual intuitions with regard to construed scenarios, we asked our participants to come up with their own scenarios and to explain why these are examples of intentional or unintentional actions. By way of content analysis, we extracted contexts and components that people associated with these action types. Our participants associated unintentional actions predominantly with bad outcomes for all persons involved and linked intentional actions more strongly to positive outcomes, especially concerning the agent. People's conceptions of intentional action seem to involve more aspects than commonly assumed in philosophical models of intentional action that solely stress the importance of intentions, desires, and beliefs. The additional aspects include decisions and thoughts about the action. In addition, we found that the criteria that participants generated for unintentional actions are not a mere inversion of those used in explanations for intentional actions. Associations between involuntariness and unintentional action seem to be stronger than associations between aspects of voluntariness and intentional action.
We describe and report on results of employing a new method for analyzing lay conceptions of intentional and unintentional action. Instead of asking people for their conceptual intuitions with regard to construed scenarios, we asked our... more
We describe and report on results of employing a new method for analyzing lay conceptions of intentional and unintentional action. Instead of asking people for their conceptual intuitions with regard to construed scenarios, we asked our participants to come up with their own scenarios and to explain why these are examples of intentional or unintentional actions. By way of content analysis, we extracted contexts and components that people associated with these action types. Our participants associated unintentional actions predominantly with bad outcomes for all persons involved and linked intentional actions more strongly to positive outcomes, especially concerning the agent. People's conceptions of intentional action seem to involve more aspects than commonly assumed in philosophical models of intentional action that solely stress the importance of intentions, desires, and beliefs. The additional aspects include decisions and thoughts about the action. In addition, we found that the criteria that participants generated for unintentional actions are not a mere inversion of those used in explanations for intentional actions. Associations between involuntariness and unintentional action seem to be stronger than associations between aspects of voluntariness and intentional action.
This thesis uses concepts developed by Ruth Millikan as part of her “biosemantic” theory of intentional signs to explain her theory of about what it means to identify the “substance” that is the object of one’s thoughts. It then applies... more
This thesis uses concepts developed by Ruth Millikan as part of her “biosemantic” theory of intentional signs to explain her theory of about what it means to identify the “substance” that is the object of one’s thoughts. It then applies these concepts and the theory to elucidate her analysis of identity statements. Finally, it develops and explores Millikan’s notion of “sameness marker” functioning, the notion being that there exist sameness markers in the mind or brain that allow people to recognize that the same substance is being encountered at different points of time. It relates this notion to Millikan’s theory of identification, on the one hand, and to her analysis of identity statements, on the other. Throughout the thesis, Millikan’s notions are contrasted with those she attributes to Frege.
Gives a history of the concept of weak definiteness and a summary of the idea of semantic incorporation. Then compares and critiques various attempts (by Carlson, Aguilar-Guevara &. Zwarts, Bosch and Cieschinger) to apply the latter to... more
Gives a history of the concept of weak definiteness and a summary of the idea of semantic incorporation. Then compares and critiques various attempts (by Carlson, Aguilar-Guevara &. Zwarts, Bosch and Cieschinger) to apply the latter to help identify the cases of the former, in particular views about when the reference is to an abstract vs. a concrete subject.
Research Interests:
An exposition of Ruth Millikan's chapter 7, "Intensionality" of her 2002 Nicod Lectures. Adds an outline, background material on Frege and Quine and brings in concepts from Millikan's other lectures on such concepts as semantic mapping... more
An exposition of Ruth Millikan's chapter 7, "Intensionality" of her 2002 Nicod Lectures. Adds an outline, background material on Frege and Quine and brings in concepts from Millikan's other lectures on such concepts as semantic mapping functions, purposes and embedding.
Research Interests:
Clarification of the central themes of Ned Block's article “The Harder Problem of Consciousness.” In particular, explains why Block thinks that the question of whether a certain kind of robot is phenomenally conscious is relevant to the... more
Clarification of the central themes of Ned Block's article “The Harder Problem of Consciousness.” In particular, explains why Block thinks that the question of whether a certain kind of robot is phenomenally conscious is relevant to the question of what phenomenal consciousness essentially is, that is, with what, if anything, it can be identified in terms of natural properties investigated by the natural sciences and difficulties with collecting empirical evidence to determine which hypothesis is correct.
Research Interests:
Research Interests: