Skip navigation
Skip navigation

Desire Beyond Belief

Hajek, Alan; Pettit, Philip

Description

David Lewis [1988; 1996] canvases an anti-Humean thesis about mental states: that the rational agent desires something to the extent that he or she believes it to be good. Lewis offers and refutes a decision-theoretic formulation of it, the 'Desire-as-Belief Thesis'. Other authors have since added further negative results in the spirit of Lewis's. We explore ways of being anti-Humean that evade all these negative results. We begin by providing background on evidential decision theory and on...[Show more]

dc.contributor.authorHajek, Alan
dc.contributor.authorPettit, Philip
dc.date.accessioned2015-12-10T22:31:15Z
dc.identifier.issn0004-8402
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1885/55459
dc.description.abstractDavid Lewis [1988; 1996] canvases an anti-Humean thesis about mental states: that the rational agent desires something to the extent that he or she believes it to be good. Lewis offers and refutes a decision-theoretic formulation of it, the 'Desire-as-Belief Thesis'. Other authors have since added further negative results in the spirit of Lewis's. We explore ways of being anti-Humean that evade all these negative results. We begin by providing background on evidential decision theory and on Lewis's negative results. We then introduce what we call the indexicality loophole: if the goodness of a proposition is indexical, partly a function of an agent's mental state, then the negative results have no purchase. Thus we propose a variant of Desire-as-Belief that exploits this loophole. We argue that a number of meta-ethical positions are committed to just such indexicality. Indeed, we show that with one central sort of evaluative belief - the belief that an option is right - the indexicality loophole can be exploited in various interesting ways. Moreover, on some accounts, 'good' is indexical in the same way. Thus, it seems that the anti-Humean can dodge the negative results.
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoen_AU
dc.publisherOxford University Press
dc.sourceAustralasian Journal of Philosophy
dc.titleDesire Beyond Belief
dc.typeJournal article
local.description.notesImported from ARIES
local.identifier.citationvolume82
dc.date.issued2004
local.identifier.absfor220399 - Philosophy not elsewhere classified
local.identifier.absfor220302 - Decision Theory
local.identifier.ariespublicationu4167262xPUB329
local.type.statusPublished Version
local.contributor.affiliationHajek, Alan, College of Arts and Social Sciences, ANU
local.contributor.affiliationPettit, Philip, Princeton University
local.description.embargo2037-12-31
local.bibliographicCitation.issue1
local.bibliographicCitation.startpage77
local.bibliographicCitation.lastpage92
local.identifier.doi10.1080/713659805
dc.date.updated2015-12-09T10:09:04Z
local.identifier.scopusID2-s2.0-61149218633
CollectionsANU Research Publications

Download

File Description SizeFormat Image
01_Hajek_Desire_Beyond_Belief_2004.pdf137.94 kBAdobe PDF    Request a copy


Items in Open Research are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Updated:  17 November 2022/ Responsible Officer:  University Librarian/ Page Contact:  Library Systems & Web Coordinator