Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-5959bf8d4d-67wr7 Total loading time: 0.275 Render date: 2022-12-09T03:29:21.702Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "useRatesEcommerce": false } hasContentIssue true

Agent causation as a solution to the problem of action

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2020

Michael Brent*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, University of Denver, Denver, CO, USA

Abstract

My primary aim is to defend a nonreductive solution to the problem of action. I argue that when you are performing an overt bodily action, you are playing an irreducible causal role in bringing about, sustaining, and controlling the movements of your body, a causal role best understood as an instance of agent causation. Thus, the solution that I defend employs a notion of agent causation, though emphatically not in defence of an account of free will, as most theories of agent causation are. Rather, I argue that the notion of agent causation introduced here best explains how it is that you are making your body move during an action, thereby providing a satisfactory solution to the problem of action.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Journal of Philosophy 2017

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aguilar, J. H. 2012. “Basic Causal Deviance, Action Repertoires, and Reliability.” Philosophical 22 (1): 119.Google Scholar
Alvarez, M. 2010. Kinds of Reasons. New York: OUP. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199550005.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alvarez, M. 2016. “Reasons for Action, Acting for Reasons, and Rationality.” Synthese. doi:10.1007/s11229-015-1005-9.Google Scholar
Alvarez, M., and Hyman, J.. 1998. “Agents and their Actions.” Philosophy 73 (2): 219245. 10.1017/S0031819198000199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arpaly, N., and Schroeder, T.. 2015. “A Causal Theory of Acting for Reasons.” American Philosophical Quarterly 54 (2): 103114.Google Scholar
Barry, M. 2007. “Realism, Rational Action, and the Humean Theory of Motivation.” Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 10 (3): 231242. 10.1007/s10677-007-9074-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bird, A. 2007. Nature's Metaphysics. New York: OUP. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199227013.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bishop, J. 1989. Natural Agency: An Essay on the Causal Theory of Action. New York: CUP.Google Scholar
Bradford, G. 2015. Achievement. New York: OUP. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198714026.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brand, M. 1984. Intending and Acting: Toward a Naturalized Action Theory. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bratman, M. E. 1987. Intentions, Plans and Practical Reason. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Bratman, M. E. 2001. “Two Problems About Human Agency.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 101 (1): 309326. 10.1111/pash.2001.101.issue-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buckareff, A. A. 2011. “How Does Agent-Causal Power Work?The Modern Schoolman 88 (1): 105121. 10.5840/schoolman2011881/27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chakravartty, A. 2005. “Causal Realism: Events and Processes.” Erkenntnis 63 (1): 731. 10.1007/s10670-005-4411-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chan, D. K. 1995. “Non-intentional Actions.” American Philosophical Quarterly 32 (2): 139151.Google Scholar
Chisholm, R. 1964. “The Descriptive Element in the Concept of Action.” The Journal of Philosophy 61 (20): 613625. 10.2307/2023443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dancy, J. 2000. Practical Reality. New York: OUP.Google Scholar
Davidson, D. 1963. “Actions, Reasons, and Causes.” The Journal of Philosophy 60 (23): 685700. 10.2307/2023177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, D. 1967. “Causal Relations.” The Journal of Philosophy 64 (21): 691703. 10.2307/2023853CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, D. 1973. “Freedom to Act.” In Essays on Freedom of Action, edited by Honderich, Ted. 137156. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Enç, B. 2003. How We Act: Causes, Reasons, and Intentions. New York: OUP.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, B. 2001. Scientific Essentialism. New York: CUP.Google Scholar
Frankfurt, H. G. 1978. “The Problem of Action.” American Philosophical Quarterly 15 (2): 157162.Google Scholar
Franklin, C. E. 2016. “If Anyone Should Be an Agent-Causalist, then Everyone Should Be an Agent-Causalist.” Mind 125 (500): 11011131. 10.1093/mind/fzv177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldman, A. 1970. A Theory of Human Action. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Harré, R., and Madden, E. H.. 1975. Causal Powers: A Theory of Natural Necessity. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Heil, J. 2012. The Universe As We Find It. Oxford: Clarendon. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199596201.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holton, R. 2009. Willing, Wanting, Waiting. New York: OUP. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199214570.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hornsby, J. 1980. Actions London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Hornsby, J. 2004. “Agency and Actions.” In Agency and Action, edited by Hyman, John and Steward, Helen. 124. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CBO9780511550843Google Scholar
Hornsby, J. 2013. “Basic Activity.” Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 87 (1): 118. 10.1111/j.1467-8349.2013.00217.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huemer, M., and Kovitz, B.. 2003. “Causation as Simultaneous and Continuous.” The Philosophical Quarterly 53 (213): 557565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hume, D. 1739/1975. A Treatise of Human Nature. Edited by Selby-Bigge, L.A.. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Kane, R. 1996. The Significance of Free Will. New York: OUP.Google Scholar
Korsgaard, C. M. 2008. The Constitution of Agency. New York: OUP. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199552733.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, D. 1973. “Causation.” The Journal of Philosophy 70 (17): 556567. 10.2307/2025310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowe, E. J. 2013. “Substance Causation, Powers, and Human Agency.” In Mental Causation and Ontology, edited by Gibb, S., Lowe, E. J. and Ingthorsson, R. D.. 153172. New York: OUP.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markosian, N. 1999. “A Compatibilist Version of The Theory of Agent Causation.” Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 80 (3): 257277. 10.1111/papq.1999.80.issue-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, C. B. 2008. The Mind in Nature. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Mayr, E. 2011. Understanding Human Agency. New York: OUP. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199606214.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCann, H. 1974. “Volition and Basic Action.” The Philosophical Review 83 (4): 451473. 10.2307/2183915CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Melden, A. I. 1961. Free Action. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Mele, A. 1992. Springs of Action. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Molnar, G. 2003. Powers: A Study in Metaphysics. Edited by Mumford, S.. New York: OUP.Google Scholar
Mumford, S., and Anjum, R. L.. 2011. Getting Causes from Powers. New York: OUP. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199695614.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelkin, D. K. 2011. Making Sense of Freedom and Responsibility. New York: OUP. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608560.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Brien, L. 2012. “Deviance and Causalism.” Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 93 (2): 175196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Shaughnessy, B. 1973. “Trying (as the Mental ‘Pineal Gland’).” The Journal of Philosophy 70 (13): 365386. 10.2307/2024676CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peacocke, C. 1979. “Deviant Causal Chains.” Midwest Studies in Philosophy 4 (1): 123155. 10.1111/j.1475-4975.1979.tb00375.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paul, S. K. 2011. “Deviant Formal Causation.” Journal of Ethics & Social Philosophy 5 (3): 123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pereboom, D. 2014. “The Disappearing Agent Objection to Event-causal Libertarianism.” Philosophical Studies 169 (1): 5969. 10.1007/s11098-012-9899-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rice, R. L. H. 2011. “Agent Causation and Acting for Reasons.” American Philosophical Quarterly 48 (4): 333346.Google Scholar
Schlosser, M. E. 2007. “Basic Deviance Reconsidered.” Analysis 67 (3): 186194. 10.1093/analys/67.3.186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schlosser, M. E. 2008. “Agent-causation and Agential Control.” Philosophical Explorations 11 (1): 321. 10.1080/13869790701750597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sehon, S. R. 2005. Teleological Realism: Mind, Agency, and Explanation. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Sehon, S. R. 2016. Free Will and Action Explanation. New York: OUP. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198758495.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shepherd, J. 2014. “The Contours of Control.” Philosophical Studies 170 (3): 395411. 10.1007/s11098-013-0236-1CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shepherd, J. 2016. “Conscious Action/zombie Action.” Noûs 50 (2): 419444.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Setiya, K. 2014. “What is a Reason to Act?Philosophical Studies 167 (2): 221235. 10.1007/s11098-012-0086-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steward, H. 2012. A Metaphysics for Freedom. New York: OUP. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199552054.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Velleman, J. D. 1992. “What Happens When Someone Acts?Mind 101 (403): 461481. 10.1093/mind/101.403.461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Agent causation as a solution to the problem of action
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Agent causation as a solution to the problem of action
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Agent causation as a solution to the problem of action
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *