green numbers give full details.     |    back to list of philosophers     |     expand these ideas

Ideas of Rowland Stout, by Text

[British, fl. 2005, Lecturer at University College, Dublin.]

2005 Action
1 'Being' p.2 Philosophy of action studies the nature of agency, and of deliberate actions
1 'How' p.6 Intentional agency is seen in internal precursors of action, and in external reasons for the act
1 'Outline' p.13 The causal theory says that actions are intentional when intention (or belief-desire) causes the act
1 'Volitionism' p.9 If the action of walking is just an act of will, then movement of the legs seems irrelevant
2 'Conclusion' p.31 The rationalistic approach says actions are intentional when subject to justification
2 'Functions' p.19 Evolutionary explanations look to the past or the group, not to the individual
3 'Emotions' p.48 Maybe your emotions arise from you motivations, rather than being their cause
3 'The belief-' p.36 For an ascetic a powerful desire for something is a reason not to implement it
3 'The belief-' p.39 Deciding what to do usually involves consulting the world, not our own minds
3 'The difference' p.40 There may be a justification relative to a person's view, and yet no absolute justification
4 'Agent' p.63 An action is only yours if you produce it, rather than some state or event within you
4 'Agent' p.63 If you don't mention an agent, you aren't talking about action
4 'The causal' p.59 Most philosophers see causation as by an event or state in the agent, rather than the whole agent
5 'Are actions' p.75 I do actions, but not events, so actions are not events
5 'Argument' p.73 Not all explanation is causal. We don't explain a painting's beauty, or the irrationality of root-2, that way
5 'Conclusion' p.82 Mental states and actions need to be separate, if one is to cause the other
5 'Do beliefs' p.76 Beliefs, desires and intentions are not events, so can't figure in causal relations
5 'Psychological' p.69 A standard view says that the explanation of an action is showing its rational justification
5 'Psychological' p.72 In order to be causal, an agent's reasons must be internalised as psychological states
7 'Acting' p.99 Should we study intentions in their own right, or only as part of intentional action?
7 'Conclusion' p.111 Bratman has to treat shared intentions as interrelated individual intentions
7 'Doctrine' p.108 Describing a death as a side-effect rather than a goal may just be good public relations
7 'Relationship' p.102 Speech needs sustained intentions, but not prior intentions
7 'Relationship' p.104 You can have incompatible desires, but your intentions really ought to be consistent
7 'Shared' p.112 A request to pass the salt shares an intention that the request be passed on
7 'Shared' p.114 An individual cannot express the intention that a group do something like moving a piano
7 'Shared' p.116 An intention is a goal to which behaviour is adapted, for an individual or for a group
8 'Intention' p.130 The normativity of intentions would be obvious if they were internal promises
8 'Weakness' p.125 If you can judge one act as best, then do another, this supports an inward-looking view of agency
9 'Are body' p.145 Bicycle riding is not just bodily movement - you also have to be on the bicycle
9 'Trying' p.149 Aristotelian causation involves potentiality inputs into processes (rather than a pair of events)
9 'What is action' p.137 Are actions bodily movements, or a sequence of intention-movement-result?
9 'What is by' p.140 If one action leads to another, does it cause it, or is it part of it?
9b 'Conclusion' p.154 Agency is causal processes that are sensitive to justification