Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Michael Bratman's own planning theory allows for intentio... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→It is not rational to plan on accomplishing both of two objectives known to be incompatible

    Michael Bratman's own planning theory allows for intentions that are 'partial plans,' leaving open sub-options that may turn out incompatible only at execution time.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Real agents face uncertainty about future conditions and must plan with incomplete information, necessitating flexibility.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Partial plans allow rational agents to defer commitment until they have better information, reducing wasted deliberation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Bratman's view captures how humans actually form intentions—we commit to ends while leaving means and timing open.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.If incompatible sub-options remain unresolved until execution, the agent lacks a determinate intention to act.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Deferring resolution of incompatibilities risks practical incoherence and undermines the rational guidance intentions provide.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedMoral Responsibility1 linked

    Related

    Bratman's view captures how humans actually form intentions—we commit to ends wh...Deferring resolution of incompatibilities risks practical incoherence and underm...If incompatible sub-options remain unresolved until execution, the agent lacks a...It is not rational to plan on accomplishing both of two objectives known to be i...
    +2 moreShow less
    Partial plans allow rational agents to defer commitment until they have better i...Real agents face uncertainty about future conditions and must plan with incomple...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit