Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Neurological compulsion, addiction, and akrasia demonstrate that agents routinely conceive plans they are causally incapable of executing.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Failed execution doesn't prove incapacity—agents might plan poorly or face unforeseen obstacles. Incapacity requires showing execution is impossible.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
The agent's neurological state causally produced the plan itself, so attributing the plan to a causally-capable agent is consistent with neurology.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Calling it 'incapacity' conflates multiple capacities (impulse control, planning, prediction) rather than identifying which actually failed.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Addicts form explicit intentions to quit while neurochemistry simultaneously reinforces continued use, showing plan-execution dissociation.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Akratic agents report genuine, conscious commitment to goals they predictably fail to pursue, indicating causal impotence despite intention.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Neuroscience shows prefrontal cortex planning regions can be neurologically overridden by limbic reward systems beyond conscious control.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.