Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T12:47:45.649Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Intention et faiblesse de la volonté

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 April 2010

Renée Bilodeau
Renée Bilodeau
Affiliation:
Université Laval
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Akrasia is both an intentional and an irrational phenomenon. These two characteristics can be reconciled by a careful reconstruction of practical reasoning. I undertake this task along Davidsonian lines, arguing against his critics that the notion of unconditional judgement is the key to an adequate account of akrasia. Unless akrasia is conceived as a failure of the agent to form an unconditional judgement that conforms to her best judgement “all things considered,” the intentionality of akrasia is lost. Likewise, I show how practical and theoretical reasonings concur in the production of action, and why akrasia is a problem for the philosophy of action before being a problem for moral philosophy.

Type
Articles
Information
Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review / Revue canadienne de philosophie , Volume 41 , Issue 1 , Winter 2002 , pp. 27 - 44
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Philosophical Association 2002

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

Références bibliographiques

Aristote, 1959 Éthique à Nicomaque, trad. J. Tricot, Paris, Vrin.Google Scholar
Austin, John L. 1956–1957 «A Plea for Excuses», Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, vol. 57; repris dans Philosophical Papers, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2e éd. 1970, p. 175–204 (les références renvoient à cette édition).Google Scholar
Bishop, John 1989 Natural Agency: An Essay on the Causal Theory of Action, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bratman, Michael 1979 «Practical Reasoning and Weakness of the Will», Noûs, vol. 13, p. 153–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bratman, Michael 1985 «Davidson's Theory of Intention», dans Vermazen et Hintikka, dir., 1985; repris, suivi d'un appendice, dans LePore et McLaughlin, dir., 1985, p. 14–28 (les références renvoient à cette édition).Google Scholar
Brink, David O. 1989 Moral Realism and the Foundations of Ethics, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carnap, Rudolf 1950 Logical Foundations of Probability, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 2e éd. revue et corrigée, 1962.Google Scholar
Charles, David 1984 Aristotle's Philosophy of Action, Ithaca, Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Davidson, Donald 1970 «How Is Weakness of the Will Possible?», dans Moral Concepts, sous la direction de J. Feinberg, Oxford, Oxford University Press; repris dans Davidson, 1980, p. 21–42 (les références renvoient à cette édition).Google Scholar
Davidson, Donald 1978 «Intending», dans Philosophy of History and Action, sous la direction de Y. Yovel, Dordrecht, Reidel; repris dans Davidson, 1980, p. 83–102 (les références renvoient à cette édition).Google Scholar
Davidson, Donald 1980 Essays on Actions and Events, Oxford, Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Davidson, Donald 1982 «Paradoxes of Irrationality)), dans Wollheim et Hopkins, dir., 1982, p. 289–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, Donald 1985a «Deception and Division», dans LePore et McLaughlin, dir., 1985, p. 138–148.Google Scholar
Davidson, Donald 1985b «Incoherence and Irrationality», Dialectica, vol. 39, n° 4, p. 345–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, Donald 1985c «A New Basis for Decision Theory», Theory and Decision, vol. 18, p. 87–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, Donald 1985d «Replies to Essays I-IX», dans Vermazen et Hintikka, dir., 1985, p. 195–229.Google Scholar
Dunn, Robert 1987 The Possibility of Weakness of the Will, Indianapolis, Hackett.Google Scholar
Grice, H. Paul et Judith, Baker 1985 «Davidson on “Weakness of the Will”», dans Vermazen et Hintikka, dir., 1985, p. 27–49.Google Scholar
Hare, Richard M. 1963 Freedom and Reason, Oxford, Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Hempel, Carl G. 1960 «Inductive Inconsistencies» repris dans Aspects of Scientific Explanation and Other Essays in the Philosophy of Science, New York, The Free Press, 1965, p. 53–79.Google Scholar
LePore, Ernest et Brian, McLaughlin, dir. 1985 Actions and Events: Perspectives on the Philosophy of Donald Davidson, Oxford, Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Mele, Alfred 1987 Irrationality: An Essay on Akrasia, Self-Deception, and Self-Control, New York, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pears, David 1982a «How Easy Is Akrasia?», Philosophia, vol. 11, p. 33–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pears, David 1982b «Motivated Irrationality, Freudian Theory and Cognitive Dissonance», dans Wollheim et Hopkins, dir., 1982, p. 264–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pears, David 1984 Motivated Irrationality, Oxford, Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Pears, David 1985 «Intention and Belief», dans Vermazen et Hintikka, dir., 1985, p. 75–88.Google Scholar
Smith, Michael 1994 The Moral Problem, Cambridge, Blackwell.Google Scholar
Thomas, d'Aquin 1950 Summa Theologiae, Caramello, P., ed., Rome, Marietti.Google Scholar
Vermazen, Bruce et Merrill, B. Hintikka, dir. 1985 Essays on Davidson: Actions and Events, Oxford, Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Wollheim, Richard et James, Hopkins, dir. 1982 Philosophical Essays on Freud, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar