Harman and others have argued that intention is best understood as a self-referential plan-state that need not be closed under the agent's beliefs about jointly achievable outcomes.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Closed under (an agent's beliefs)(the statement says intention does NOT need to have this property): When a set of ideas is 'closed under' something, it means that applying that something to any idea in the set keeps you within the set; here it means if you believe two things are achievable, you automatically believe doing both together is achievable.
Harman(as a philosopher whose work is being discussed): Gilbert Harman is a philosopher who developed influential theories about abduction and how we form beliefs based on the best available explanation.
Jointly achievable outcomes(what the agent's beliefs might be about, regarding multiple actions): Results or goals that can be accomplished together at the same time, where doing one action doesn't prevent you from doing another.
Plan-state(how intention is being characterized in Harman's theory): A mental condition where your mind contains a specific plan or course of action you intend to follow.

Based on where you are in your exploration