tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3891434218564545511.post1003129399396572969..comments2024-03-27T20:37:09.185-05:00Comments on Alexander Pruss's Blog: IntentionsAlexander R Prusshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05989277655934827117noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3891434218564545511.post-54794028277866859762010-01-03T20:22:48.000-06:002010-01-03T20:22:48.000-06:00Well, wait. My argument seems to show that the fo...Well, wait. My argument seems to show that the following are compossible:<br /> 1. X intends to kill Y<br /> 2. X does not intend that Y die<br /><br />Now, <br /><br /> 3. X intentionally kills Y<br /><br />is entailed by 1. Since 3 is entailed by 1, and 1 and 2 are compossible, likewise 3 and 2 are compossible. But if 3 and 2 are compossible, then: even if X intentionally kills Y (that's what 3 says), it does not follow that X intends that Y die (that's the negation of 2).<br /><br />I don't think STIT is intending. Belnap et al.'s STIT just doesn't cut finely enough for intending. One can have events E and F such that E necessarily happens iff F does, but one can still intend E without intending F, even if one knows about the equivalence (mere knowledge does not change one's intentions).Alexander R Prusshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05989277655934827117noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3891434218564545511.post-27927836842232697062009-12-31T21:51:47.807-06:002009-12-31T21:51:47.807-06:00I think you have to be careful between "inten...I think you have to be careful between "intentionally" and "intends". What your argument seems to argue for is that even if X intends to kill Y, and succeeds, it does not follow that X intends that Y die. It is also true that if X intends to kill Y, and succeeds, then X has intentionally killed Y. But those two propositions do not combine to yield the proposition that: even if X intentionally kills Y then it does not follow that X intends that Y die.<br /><br />There is a pretty persuasive logic for intending laid out in Belnap et al, _Facing the Future_, under the label of "seeing to it that," if you care to explore it.<br /><br />With respect to both Freds, it seems to me there is an easier way out for the DDE theorist. It may be that Fred's death is inevitable or likely, and on this basis a Fred-killer does not intend that Fred die. However, the killing of Fred (by this agent) is not inevitable or likely unless the agent so chooses, so that can be the evil to be avoided.Heath Whitehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13535886546816778688noreply@blogger.com