Porcelain Publishing / JHC / Volume 5 / Issue 1 / DOI: 10.47297/wspjhcWSP2515-469904.20210501
ARTICLE

A New Kind of Action Explanation and The Life of Complex Action

Xingfei Zheng1
Show Less
1 Peking University Beijing 100091, Peking University Beijing 100091
© Invalid date by the Author(s). This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ )
Abstract

Ordinary action explanation formulated as "I am doing A because I am doing B" is explanation of an action in terms of another action-in-progress. According to Michael Thompson, the explained action is a teleological part of the explaining complex action, which is composed of different parts. Thompson's analysis focuses on the part-whole relation between the explained action and the explaining action, thus ignores a possibility: these two actions can be two different parts of a complex action. I shall argue that the interrelation between different parts of a complex action corresponds to a new kind of action explanation of the formulas: "I am doing A because I am doing B" and "I am doing B because I have done A", where A and B are two different parts of a complex action. This kind of action explanation is associated with the temporal schema of an action-type, for example, X: First, do A; second, do B; then, C; finally, D. This is an attempt to probe into the inner structure of complex action.

Keywords
Complex action; Action explanation; Part-part relation; Temporal schema
References

[1]Anscombe G E M.Intention[M].Cambridge:Harvard University Press,2000.

[2]Austin J L.A Plea for Excuses[M].Oxford:Clarendon Press,1961.

[3]Boyle L.Goodness and Desire[M].Oxford:Oxford University Press,2010.

[4]Davidson D.Action,Reasons and Causes[J].Essays on Actions and Events,2001,3-20.

[5]Davidson D.Agency[J].Essays on Actions and Events,2001,43-62.

[6]Falvey.Knowledge in Intention[J].Philosophical Studies,2000,99(1):21-44.

[7]Frey J.Anscombe on Practical Knowledge and the Good[J].Ergo,2019,39:1121-1151.

[8]Frey J.Happiness as the Constitutive Principle of Action in Thomas Aquinas[J].Philosophical Explorations,2019,22(2):208-221.

[9]Ford A.Action and Generality[J].Pittsburgh PhD Dissertation,2008.

[10]Ford A.Essays on Anscombe’s Intention[M].Cambridge:Harvard Univer‐sity Press,2011.

[11]Lavin D.Must There Be Basic Actions[J].Noûs,2013,47(2):273-301.

[12]Müller A.Backward-looking Rationality and the Unity of Practical Reason[M].Cambridge:Harvard University Press,2011.

[13]Rödl S.Self-Consciousness[M].Cambridge:Harvard University Press,2007.

[14]Rödl S.The Form of the Will[M].Oxford:Oxford University Press,2010.

[15]Setiya K.Reasons without Rationalism[M].Princeton:Princeton UniversityPress,2007.

[16]Smith M.The Structure of Orthonomy[J].Royal Institute of PhilosophySupplement,2004,55:165-193.

[17]Stout R.Ballistic Action[M].Oxford:Oxford University Press,2018.

[18]Tenenbaum S.Desire,Practical Reason,and the Good[M].Oxford:OxfordUniversity Press,2010.

[19]Thompson M.Life and Action[M].Cambridge:Harvard University Press,2008.

[20]Wilson G.The Intentionality of Human Action[M].Stanford:Stanford Uni‐versity Press,1989.

[21]Valaris M.The Instrumental Structure of Actions[J].Philosophical Quar‐terly,2015,65:64-83.

Share
Back to top
Journal of Human Cognition, Electronic ISSN: 2753-5215 Print ISSN: 2515-4699, Published by Porcelain Publishing