Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T15:07:12.211Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Agency is realized by subpersonal mechanisms too

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2018

Neil Levy
Neil Levy*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia. Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 1PT, UK. [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

John Doris argues that, when behaviors are caused by processes that we would not endorse, our agency is defeated. I argue that this test for defeaters is inappropriate. What matters is not what we would but what we should endorse. The subpersonal mechanisms he identifies as defeaters enable us to track and respond to reasons. They realize agency, rather than defeating it.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 41 , 2018 , e49
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Doris, J. M. (2015b). Talking to our selves: Reflection, ignorance, and agency. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischer, J. M. & Ravizza, M. (1998) Responsibility and control: A theory of moral responsibility. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gigerenzer, G. (2008) Why heuristics work. Perspectives on Psychological Science 3:20–29.Google Scholar
Johnson, E. J. & Goldstein, D. (2003) Do defaults save lives? Science 302(5649):1338–39.Google Scholar
Levy, N. (2014) Consciousness and moral responsibility. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Marcinkiewicz, K. (2014) Electoral contexts that assist voter coordination: Ballot position effects in Poland. Electoral Studies 33:322–34.Google Scholar
McKenna, M. (2017) Reasons-responsive theories of freedom. In: The Routledge companion to free will, ed. Timpe, K., Griffith, M. & Levy, N., pp. 27–40. Routledge.Google Scholar
Todd, P. M. & Gigerenzer, G. (2007) Environments that make us smart ecological rationality. Current Directions in Psychological Science 16:167–71.Google Scholar
Wilson, T. D. & Schooler, J. W. (1991) Thinking too much: Introspection can reduce the quality of preferences and decisions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 60:181–92.Google Scholar