Abstract
Contemporary philosophers have broadly studied intentional actions that agents attempt to perform in the world. However, logicians of action have tended to neglect the intentionality proper to human action. I will present here the basic principles and laws of a logic of individual action where intentional actions are primary as in contemporary philosophy of action. In my view, any action that an agent performs unintentionally could in principle have been attempted. Moreover any unintentional action of an agent is an effect of intentional actions of that agent. So my logic of action contains a theory of attempt and of action generation. As Belnap pointed out, action, branching time and historic modalities are logically related. There is the liberty of voluntary action. I will then work out a logic of action that is compatible with indeterminism.
Propositions with the same truth conditions are not the contents of the same attitudes of human agents. For that reason I will exploit the resources of a non classical modal and temporal predicative propositional logic capable of distinguishing the contents of intentional actions which are different. My primary purpose is enrich the logic of agency so as to adequately characterize attempts, intentional actions and the different kinds of action generation.
A first draft of this paper has been published in the special issue on Mental Causation of Manuscrito Vol XXV, 2002 pp 323–356). I thank Manuscrito for granting permission to republish the paper here. I am also grateful to Elias Alves, Nuel Belnap, Jean Caelen, Paul Gochet, Hans Kamp, J-Nicolas Kaufmann, André Leclerc, Ken MacQueen, Raymond Klibansky, Michel Paquette, Giovanni Queiroz, John Searle, Philippe de Rouilhan, Candida Jaci de Sousa Melo and Denis Vernant for their critical remarks.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Belnap N. & Perloff M. (1990). “Seeing to it: a Canonical Form for Agentives”, in Kyburg H.E. et al, Knowledge Representation and Defeasible Reasoning. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press.
Belnap N. & Perloff M. (1992). “The Way of the Agent”, Studia Logica, 51.
Belnap N., Perloff M. & Ming Xu (2001). Facing the Future Agents and Choices in Our Indeterminist World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bratman M. (1987). Intentions, Plans and Practical Reason. Harvard University Press.
Carnap R. (1956). Meaning and Necessity. University of Chicago Press.
Chellas B.F. (1992). “Time and Modality in the Logic of Agency”. Studia Logica, 51.
Davidson D. (1980). Essays on Action & Events. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Goldman A. (1970). A Theory of Human Action. Princeton University Press.
Horty J.F. “An Alternative stit Operator” Unpublished seminar notes.
Marcus R. Barcan (1983). Modalities. Oxford University Press.
Montague R. (1974). Formal Philosophy. Yale University Press.
Prior A.N. (1967). Past, Present, Future. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Searle J.R. (1983). Intentionality. Cambridge University Press.
____ (2001). Rationality in Action. A Bradford Book, MIT press.
Searle J.R. & Vanderveken D. (1985). Foundations of Illocutionary Logic. Cambridge University Press.
Thomason R. (1984). “Combinations of Tense and Modality”, in D. Gabbay & F. Guenthner (eds.), Handbook of Philosophical Logic, Vol. 2.
Thomason R. & A. Gupta (1980). “A Theory of Conditionals in the Context of Branching Time”, Philosophical Review, 89.
Vanderveken D. (1990–91). Meaning and Speech Acts, Volume I: Principles of Language Use and Volume II: Formal Semantics of Success and Satisfaction. Cambridge University Press.
____ (1997). “Formal Pragmatics of Non Literal Meaning”, in the special issue Pragmatik of Linguistische Berichte edited by E. Rolf, 135–148.
____ “Propositional Identity, Truth According to Predication and Strong Implication”, Chapter 10 of the present volume.
____ (2001). “Universal Grammar and Speech Act Theory” in D. Vanderveken & S. Kubo, Essays in Speech Act Theory, Benjamins, P&b ns 77, 25–62.
____ (2003). Attempt and Action Generation Towards the Foundations of the Logic of Action in Cahiers d’espistémologie 2003:02. Montréal: UQAM. 43 pages. www.philo.uqam.ca
____ (2004). “Success, Satisfaction and Truth in the Logic of Speech Acts and Formal Semantics”, in S. Davis & B. Gillan (eds), A Reader in Semantics, forthcoming at Oxford University Press.
____ Propositions, Truth and Thought. Forthcoming.
Von Neumann J. & Morgenstern O. (1944). Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. Princeton University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2002 Springer
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Vanderveken, D. (2002). Attempt, Success and Action Generation: A Logical Study of Intentional Action. In: Vanderveken, D. (eds) Logic, Thought and Action. Logic, Epistemology, and the Unity of Science, vol 2. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3167-X_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3167-X_15
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-2616-4
Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-3167-0
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawSocial Sciences (R0)