Explaining Behavior: Reasons in a World of Causes



Explaining Behavior: Reasons in a World of CausesWhy Do Human Beings Move In This Lucid Portrayal Of Human Behavior, Fred Dretske Provides An Original Account Of The Way Reasons Function In The Causal Explanation Of Behavior Biological Science Investigates What Makes Our Bodies Move In The Way They Do Psychology Is Interested In Why Persons Agents With Reasons Move In The Way They Do Dretske Attempts To Reconcile These Different Points Of View By Showing How Reasons Operate In A World Of Causes He Reveals In Detail How The Character Of Our Inner States What We Believe, Desire, And Intend Determines What We Do

Frederick Irwin Dretske is a philosopher noted for his contributions to epistemology and the philosophy of mind Recent work centers on conscious experience and self knowledge He was awarded the Jean Nicod Prize in 1994 Dretske received his Ph.D from The University of Minnesota and taught for a number of years at the University of Wisconsin Madison before moving to Stanford University After retiring from Stanford, he moved to Duke University where he is now research professor of Philosophy.Dretske holds externalist views about the mind, and thus he tries in various writings to show that by means of mere introspection one actually learns about his own mind less than might be expected.

[BOOKS] ✯ Explaining Behavior: Reasons in a World of Causes ✹ Fred I. Dretske – Heartforum.co.uk
  • Paperback
  • 182 pages
  • Explaining Behavior: Reasons in a World of Causes
  • Fred I. Dretske
  • English
  • 01 May 2019
  • 0262540614

10 thoughts on “Explaining Behavior: Reasons in a World of Causes

  1. Usfromdk says:

    I forgot to mark this book as read, despite having finished it a while ago I was debating for a while whether to rate this book or not, but in the end I decided to do it and to give it one star The book has way too much philosophy and speculation and way too little neuro science Especially absent from the book is any sort of indication of how the theory being developed might be used to predict anything empirically, rather than just being a sort of explanatory model that is really when you I forgot to mark this book as read, despite having finished it a while ago I was debating for a while whether to rate this book or not, but in the end I decided to do it and to give it one star The book has way too much philosophy and speculation and way too little neuro science Especially absent from the book is any sort of indication of how the theory being developed might be used to predict anything empirically, rather than just being a sort of explanatory model that is really when you come right down to it just about what you might decide to call different aspects of behaviour and motivation The author notes on page 126 that There is, of course, no point in arguing about words , but when I read that comment I couldn t help thinking that if he really thinks that, he must also think that his book is completely pointless, because that s really pretty much all this book is doing arguing about words When is something a belief, and when is it only properly to be considered a desire Who gives a crap Why is this distinction of any relevance to anything I m sure the author would argue that if only I d read the bookcarefully I would be able to better appreciate why this distinction is important but I figure a lot of what he s doing in this book is just a bunch of useless word games and definitions Some of the implicit assumptions in the book used to justify the distinctions made seemed to me both arbitrary and problematic.The book contains a lot of speculation, a lot of what seemed to me butor less irrelevant distinctions and subtleties of no relevance to anything Most of the book is about how you might decide to classify different types of behaviours and behavioural motivations, but why you would want to use the classification system on offer by the author is basically blowing in the wind It felt to me a bit like reading an economist who hasn t learned any math yet let s define x this way, let s define y that way, but let s not develop any sort of testable model but instead just talk about these things and z, and q, and until the reader gets bored enough to close the book I did read the book to the end, but that was mostly because I was deeply confused as to where the author was heading When I finished I concluded that he probably didn t know either.Not all the observations, distinctions, and details included in the book are worthless, but all in all I thought this was a weak book which didn t really go anywhere A disappointing read

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *