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
    One can only control one's own actions, not those of othe... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Moral Responsibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Bratman's account of shared intention is defective because intentions of the form 'I intend that we X' violate the condition that one can only control one's own actions.

    One can only control one's own actions, not those of other agents.

    Moral ResponsibilityPhilosophy of Language
    ?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.

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

    Topics

    Moral ResponsibilityPhilosophy of Language

    Related

    Bratman treats intentions of the form 'I intend that we X' as basic to the inten...Bratman's account of shared intention is defective because intentions of the for...

    Similar

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Moral Responsibility
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    One can only intend one's own action, not the actions of others.84%If an agent's actions are the unavoidable consequences of things over ...82%Moral responsibility requires that agents have control over the action...80%Neither agent in a shared activity controls the other's intention form...80%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: collective-intentionality
    View source passageHide passage
    Thus, the claim here is that intentions of the form “I intend that we X” are basic to the intentionality of joint action. Critics have argued that Bratman’s account is defective in so far as it treats intentions of that form as basic, since they violate either (1) the condition that one can only intend one’s own action, or (2) the condition that one can only control one’s own and no other agent’s actions, or (3) the condition that one can only intend what one can take to be in a position to sett

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective