Re: [Critical-Realism] thoughts, ideas and action

["Louis Irwin" <louisirwin9@xxxxxxx>]

Mark,

A comment on "Weakness of the will may simply be the absence of the
appropriate disposition to act".  Isn't that in fact a truism, rather than
an insight into weakness of will?  Isn't an intention to act a disposition
to do so, almost by definition?

The general problem with weakness of will is this: How is it even
conceivable that one has a genuine intention yet fails to act on it? One
response might be: Well, if you failed to act on it, then you did not have a
GENUINE knowledge.  Yet our experience does not accord well with that
response: we all feel that there are times in which we genuinely intended to
do something yet failed to take action even though there was no external
obstacle.

It seems to me that the organization issue has to do with one's capability
of carrying out an intention: an alleged intention to do something that is
beyond my means probably should not be counted as a genuine intention.  But
the problem with weakness of will occurs when the action is within the realm
of possibility.

Please note I am just laying the issue out, I'm not taking a position.

Louis 

-----Original Message-----
From: critical-realism-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:critical-realism-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mark
Johnson
Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2007 9:01 PM
To: Continuation of the Spoon Bhaskar List
Subject: Re: [Critical-Realism] thoughts, ideas and action

You also have to have the 'technical disposition' (i.e. skill, instruments
to hand, etc) to express yourself through writing at the appropriate moment.
The organisation of these practical things is, I suspect, more fundamental
than we often give it credit for. Instruments are not transparent vehicles
of communication - they are causal factors in the process - I think of
Beethoven's notebooks... Weakness of the will may simply be the absence of
the appropriate disposition to act - in other words, a lack of appropriate
organisation.

Also, where is the intentionality? in the head? Many artists would disagree
- technical, instrumentally-driven action, the enacting of routine habits,
etc can be a prelude to engaged critical reflection. Hence Picasso's famous
"I do not seek, I find". I bet there are quite a few philosophers who work
like that too.

Mark
On Dec 8, 2007 11:23 PM, Louis Irwin <louisirwin9@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> Melanie,
>
> Quite apart from CR, it's not just the thought that you will write a 
> sentence that could even tempt one to think it causes you to write - 
> it is the intention to do so. Even so, we all know that we form 
> intentions that we don't fulfill or even try to.  In  philosophy there 
> is the problem of "weakness of will" (aka "incontinence", "akrasia") 
> that has a long history back to Aristotle.  Some philosophers think 
> that intentions have to cause the actions that lead to fulfillment (or 
> at least attempts at fulfillment)
> -
> otherwise you could not properly be said to have the intention.  
> Others think there are gaps between intentions and actions.  John 
> Searle has a discussion in his book "Rationality in Action".
>
> Louis
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: critical-realism-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:critical-realism-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of 
> m.mcdonald.10@xxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Friday, December 07, 2007 11:22 PM
> To: critical-realism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [Critical-Realism] thoughts, ideas and action
>
> Hey there, I have a small query.
>
> I am having a bit of trouble reconciling two different things that 
> Bhaskar has written about the relationship between thoughts, ideas, and
action.
>
> In The philosophy of meta-Reality Volume 1: creativity, love and 
> freedom (Vol. 1), Bhaskar writes about how "the paradigm of thinking 
> leading to action is false" (footnote 18, page 82). I think the main 
> point of this argument is that at some level of determinacy action 
> must be spontaneous and 'unthought', and in leading to this point he 
> argues that 'the thought of the action is not the cause of the 
> action'. And yet in his article 'On the Ontological Status of Ideas', 
> Bhaskar argues that ideas are real because they are causally 
> efficacious (1997 p.143).
>
> Let me try to illustrate my point.
>
> I can have the thought "I will write a sentence to illustrate my 
> point", which (from my perspective) actually  causes me to write a 
> sentence to illustrate my point. Of course, the actual act of typing 
> the sentence may be spontaneous and unthought, but without the initial 
> thought or idea to write it, I really don't think I would have written 
> it. In this sense, my thought or idea was causally efficacious, and 
> yet in the philosophy of meta-Reality Bhaskar seems to be suggesting 
> that thoughts do not cause action. Can you see what I am getting at? 
> How do I reconcile this?
>
> Perhaps there is a subtle difference between what Bhaskar refers to 
> when he speaks of 'thoughts' and the act of 'thinking', and what he 
> refers to when he speaks of 'ideas'. I seem to use the words 'thought'
> and 'idea' interchangeably, for example, "I had a thought" or "I had 
> an idea", in this respect, my referent for both 'thought' and 'idea' 
> are the same. And yet, it appears that this may be different for Bhaskar.
>
> Hmmm, any ideas or thoughts?
>
> thanks,
> Melanie
>
> Melanie McDonald
> PhD Candidate
> School of Education
> Southern Cross University
> Lismore 2480 Australia
> _______________________________________________
> Critical-Realism mailing list
> Critical-Realism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/critical-realism
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Critical-Realism mailing list
> Critical-Realism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/critical-realism
>
_______________________________________________
Critical-Realism mailing list
Critical-Realism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/critical-realism


_______________________________________________
Critical-Realism mailing list
Critical-Realism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/critical-realism