Agency and Virtues

نوع مقاله: مقاله علمی پژوهشی

نویسنده

استاد گروه فلسفه و کلام دانشگاه قم

چکیده

Zahra khazaei*
Received: 01/07/2019     |       Accepted: 11/09/2019
In the philosophy of action, agency manifests the capacity of the agent to act. An agent is one who acts voluntarily, consciously and intentionally. This article studies the relationship between virtues and agency to learn to what extent agency is conceptually and metaphysically dependent on moral or epistemic virtues; whether virtue is a necessary condition for action and agency, besides the belief, desire and intention? Or are virtues necessary merely for the moral or epistemic character of the agent and not his agency? If virtues are constructive elements of personal identity, can we say that virtues are necessary for action and agency? If we accept that virtues play a role in agency, the principle of “Ought Implies Can” makes us face a new challenge; which we will discuss. After explaining the concept of action and agency, I will study the relationship between agency and virtues in the field of ethics and epistemology. Ultimately, I conclude that not only in theories of virtue but also in other ethical theories, virtue is independently necessary for the actualization of agency; even if, conceptually, there might not be any relation between the two. In many cases, virtue can also have a crucial role in prudential agency.

 


* Ph.D., Professor. Department of Islamic Philosophy and Theology, University of Qom, Qom, Iran.        ׀      Z-khazaei@qom.ac.ir

🞕 khazaei. Z. (2019). Agency and Virtues. The Journal of Philosophical-Theological Research, 21(81), 119-140.  doi: 10.22091/jptr.2019.4673.2190.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Agency and Virtues

نویسنده [English]

  • zahra khazaei
Ph.D., Professor. Department of Islamic Philosophy and Theology, University of Qom, Qom, Iran.
چکیده [English]

Zahra khazaei*
Received: 01/07/2019     |       Accepted: 11/09/2019
In the philosophy of action, agency manifests the capacity of the agent to act. An agent is one who acts voluntarily, consciously and intentionally. This article studies the relationship between virtues and agency to learn to what extent agency is conceptually and metaphysically dependent on moral or epistemic virtues; whether virtue is a necessary condition for action and agency, besides the belief, desire and intention? Or are virtues necessary merely for the moral or epistemic character of the agent and not his agency? If virtues are constructive elements of personal identity, can we say that virtues are necessary for action and agency? If we accept that virtues play a role in agency, the principle of “Ought Implies Can” makes us face a new challenge; which we will discuss. After explaining the concept of action and agency, I will study the relationship between agency and virtues in the field of ethics and epistemology. Ultimately, I conclude that not only in theories of virtue but also in other ethical theories, virtue is independently necessary for the actualization of agency; even if, conceptually, there might not be any relation between the two. In many cases, virtue can also have a crucial role in prudential agency.

 


* Ph.D., Professor. Department of Islamic Philosophy and Theology, University of Qom, Qom, Iran.        ׀      Z-khazaei@qom.ac.ir

🞕 khazaei. Z. (2019). Agency and Virtues. The Journal of Philosophical-Theological Research, 21(81), 119-140.  doi: 10.22091/jptr.2019.4673.2190.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Keywords: agency
  • action
  • moral virtue
  • epistemic virtue
  • the principle of “Ought Implies Can”

-  Aguilar, J. H., & Buckareff, A. (2015). A Gradualist Metaphysics of Agency. In A. Buckareff, C. Moya, & S. Rosell (Eds.), Agency, Freedom, and Moral Responsibility (pp. 30–43). doi: 10.1057/9781137414953_3

-  Anscombe, E. (1957). Intention. Harvard University Press,.Reprinted in 1963, Oxford: Blackwell and in 2000, Harvard University Press.

-  Aristotle. (2000). Aristotle: Nicomachean Ethics (R. Crisp, Trans.). Cambridge, U.K.; New York: Cambridge University Press.

-  Bratman, M. E. (1987). Intention, Plans and Practical Reason. Cambridge:Harvard University Press.

-  Bratman, M. E. (1999). Faces of Intention: Selected Essays on Intention and Agency. Cambridge University Press.

-  Dancy, J. (2004). Two Ways of Explaining Actions, Agency and Action, Ed. By John Hyman and Helen Steward, Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement, 55, Cambridge University Press, pp. 25-43.

-  Davidson, D. (1970). How is Weakness of the Will Possible? In J. Fienberg (Ed.) Moral Concepts. Reprinted in Essays on Actions and Events, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1980, pp. 21–42; 2001, pp. 25-43.

-  Davidson, D. (1978). Intending, in Yirmiaka Yovel, (Ed.) Philosophy of History and Action. Dordrecht, Holand: D. Reidel, pp. 41-60. Reprinted in Essays on Actions and Events, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1980, pp. 83–102.

-  Davidson, D. (1980). Essays on Actions and Events. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 21-42; reprinted in 2001, pp. 25-43.

-  Feldman, R. (2001). Voluntary Belief and Epistemic Evaluation, in Knowledge, Truth and Duty: Essays on Epistemic Justification, Responsibility and Virtue, Ed. by Matthias Steup, Oxford University Press, pp. 77 – 92.

-  Fischer, J. M. (1999). Recent Work on Moral Responsibility. Ethics, 110(1), 93–139. doi: 10.1086/233206

-  Frankfurt, H. G. (2003). Alternate Possibilities and Moral Responsibility. In Moral Responsibility and Alternate Possibilities, Eds. David Widerker & Michael Mckenna, USA: Ashgata, pp. 17-25.

-  Ginet, C. (1990). OnAction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

-  Harris, S. (2012). Free Will. Free Press. NY. USA.

-  Holton, R. (1999). Intention and Weakness of Will. The Journal of Philosophy, 96(5), 241. doi: 10.2307/2564667

-  Hornsby, J. (2004). Agency and Actions. In Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement (pp. 1-23). Cambridge University Press.

-  Jacobs, J. (2001). Choosing Character: Responsibility for Virtue and Vice. Ithaca, N.Y: Cornell University Press.

-  Kane, R. (2007). Libertarianism. In E. Sosa (Ed.), Four Views on Free Will (1 edition). Malden, MA ; Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 5-45.

-  Kane, R. (2007). Libertarianism. In J. M. Fischer, D. Pereboom, & M. Vargas (Eds.), Four Views on Free Will (1 edition, pp. 5–45). Malden, MA ; Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.

-  Khazaei, Z. (2011). Moral Generalism or Particularism? Philosophy Study, 1(4), 247-257.

-  Khazaei, Z. ; Tamadon, F. (2013/1392). Compatibilism, A Bridge between Determinism and Free Will, Journal of Religious Thought (Andisheye Dini), 13(2), pp. 21-46.

-  Korsgaard, C. M. (2009). Self-Constitution: Agency, Identity, and Integrity (1 edition). Oxford ; New York: Oxford University Press.

-  Korsgaard, C. M. (2019). Constitutivism and the virtues. Philosophical Explorations, 22(2), 98–116. doi: 10.1080/13869795.2019.1599050

-  Levy, N. (2002). Are We Responsible for Our Characters?. Ethica, 1, 115–132.

-  Lowe, E. J. (2015), Personal Agency, The Metaphysics of Mind and Action, Oxford University Press.

-  McCann, H. J., (2013). Action, The International Encyclopedia of Ethics. Ed. by Hugh LaFollette, pp. 38-48. Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

-  Mele, A. (1987). Irrationality. Oxford University Press.

-  Mele, A. (2010). Weakness of will and akrasia. Philosophical Studies, 150(3), 391-404. doi: 10.1007/s11098-009-9418-2

-  Mizrahi, M. (2009). ‘Ought’ Does Not Imply ‘Can.’ Philosophical Frontiers, 4(1), 19-35.

-  Mizrahi, M. (2012). Does ‘Ought’ Imply ‘Can’ From an Epistemic Point of View? Philosophia, 40(4), 829–840. doi: 10.1007/s11406-012-9389-y

-  Moody-Adams, M. (1990). On the old saw that character is destiny. Identity, character, and morality: Essays in moral psychology, Owen Flanagan and Amélie Oksenberg Rorty, MIT Press, pp. 111-31.

-  Moya, C. (2006). Moral Responsibility : The Ways of Skepticism. London and New York: Routledge.

-  Murphy, N. (2006). Bodies and Souls, or Spirited Bodies? Cambridge, UK ; New York: Cambridge University Press.

-  Murphy, N., & Brown, W. S. (2007). Did My Neurons Make Me Do It?: Philosophical and Neurobiological Perspectives on Moral Responsibility and Free Will. Oxford ; New York: Oxford University Press.

-  Pereboom, D., (2007). Hard Incompatibilism, In E. Sosa (Ed.) Four Views on Free Will. USA: Blackwell.

-  Runyan, J. (2013). Human Agency and Neural Causes: Philosophy of Action and the Neuroscience of Voluntary Agency. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

-  Sebo, J. (2017). Agency and Moral Status. Journal of Moral Philosophy, 14(1), 1–22. doi: 10.1163/17455243-46810046

-  Schlosser, M. (2015) Agency, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2015/entries/agency/

-  Sinnott-Armstrong, W. (1984). `Ought’ Conversationally Implies `Can’. The Philosophical Review, 93(2), 249. doi: 10.2307/2184585

-  Sosa, E. (1980). The Raft and the Pyramid: Coherence Versus Foundations in the Theory of Knowledge. Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 5(1), 3–26. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-4975.1980.tb00394.x

-  Sosa, E. (2007). A Virtue Epistemology: Apt Belief and Reflective Knowledge, Volume I (1 edition, Vol. 1). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

-  Sosa, E. (2015a). Judgment and Agency. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

-  Sosa, E. (2015b). Virtue Epistemology: Character vs. Competence. in M. Alfano (Ed). Current Controversies in Virtue Theory. New York: Routledge, pp. 62-74.

-  Trianosky, G. (1990). Natural affection and responsibility for character: A critique of Kantian views of the virtues. In O. Flanagan & A. O. Rorty (Eds.), Identity, Character, and Morality: Essays in Moral Psychology (New edition edition, pp. 93–109). Cambridge, MA: A Bradford Book.

-  Vranas, P. B. M. (2007). I Ought, Therefore I Can. Philosophical Studies, 136(2), 167–216. doi: 10.1007/s11098-007-9071-6

-  Watson, G. (1975). Free Agency. The Journal of Philosophy, 72(8), 205. doi: 10.2307/2024703

-  Wolfe, S. (2013). Sanity and the Metaphysics of Responsibility. In R. Shafer-Landau (Ed.), Ethical Theory: An Anthology (2nd ed., pp. 363–373). Wiley-Blackwell.

-  Zagzebski, L. (2010). Exemplarist Virtue Theory. Metaphilosophy, 41(1–2), 41–57. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9973.2009.01627.x

-  Zagzebski, L. (2012). “Virtue Theory and Exemplars.” Philosophical News, 4, pp. 156–61.

-  Zagzebski, L. T. (1996). Virtues of the Mind: An Inquiry into the Nature of Virtue and the Ethical Foundations of Knowledge (Recent Printing edition). New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press.

-  Zimmerman, M. J. (1996). The Concept of Moral Obligation, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

CAPTCHA Image