Is the 'trade-off hypothesis' worth trading for?

Mind and Language 24 (2):164-180 (2009)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Abstract: Recently, the experimental philosopher Joshua Knobe has shown that the folk are more inclined to describe side effects as intentional actions when they bring about bad results. Edouard Machery has offered an intriguing new explanation of Knobe's work—the 'trade-off hypothesis'—which denies that moral considerations explain folk applications of the concept of intentional action. We critique Machery's hypothesis and offer empirical evidence against it. We also evaluate the current state of the debate concerning the concept of intentionality, and argue that, given the number of variables at play, any parsimonious account of the relevant data is implausible.
Keywords
No keywords specified (fix it)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
PHEITT
Upload history
Archival date: 2019-03-01
View other versions
Added to PP index
2009-03-31

Total views
134 ( #31,666 of 54,532 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
7 ( #50,152 of 54,532 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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