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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that The standard theory of agency is not too demanding, even if some non-human beings capable of agency lack representational mental states

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Dennett's intentional stance shows that representational states are not intrinsic properties but interpretive posits, undermining any principled distinction between 'basic' and 'intentional' agency.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If representational mental states are merely heuristic attributions, then the standard theory's tiered account collapses into a single framework with no non-arbitrary boundary between agency kinds.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Frankfurt's hierarchical account of agency requires second-order volitions, which presuppose representational states, making non-representational agency conceptually subordinate rather than genuinely continuous with full agency.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A theory that demotes non-representational agency to a 'more basic kind' systematically excludes it from the morally and practically significant domain the standard theory was designed to explain.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The standard theory can be construed as providing an account of one particularly interesting and central kind of agency — intentional agency — rather than agency as such
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.On this construal, the standard theory is compatible with the existence of more basic kinds of agency that do not require representational mental states
      ?

      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.