Do We Need Partial Intentions?

Philosophia 45 (3):995-1005 (2017)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Richard Holton has argued that the traditional account of intentions—which only posits the existence of all-out intentions—is inadequate because it fails to accommodate dual-plan cases; ones in which it is rationally permissible for an agent to adopt two competing plans to bring about the same end. Since the consistency norms governing all-out intentions prohibit the adoption of competing intentions, we can only preserve the idea that the agent in a dual-plan case is not being irrational if we attribute to them a pair of partial intentions. I argue that, contrary to initial appearances, (i) Holton has yet to offer us an actual account of partial intentions, and (ii) that the traditional account of intentions already has the resources necessary to accommodate dual-plan cases.
Reprint years
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Upload history
Archival date: 2017-04-13
View other versions
Added to PP index

Total views
354 ( #16,903 of 2,433,548 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
71 ( #9,684 of 2,433,548 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.