gary watson

Announcements

  • Test Schedule

    • Test 3 is scheduled for Wednesday of next week.
    • A PowerPoint study guide will be posted by the end of the day.

  • Class Structure for Monday

    • No assigned readings for Monday’s class.
    • The class will focus on reviewing the PowerPoint and will include an open Q&A session regarding the four readings covered in the second learning podcast.
    • An email will be sent to ensure all students are informed in advance.

Review of Frankfurt's Theory

  • Hierarchy of Desires

    • Frankfurt argues for a hierarchy of desires, comprising:
    • First Order Desires: Basic wants or preferences (e.g., wanting to eat, sleep, do drugs).
    • Second Order Desires: Reflective desires about first order desires (e.g., wanting to want to stop using drugs).

  • Will as a Decisive Commitment

    • The will involves a decisive commitment to a particular first-order desire, allowing individuals to choose which desire to endorse.
    • Example:
    • Imagine having 50 first order desires—a second order desire allows you to pull one out and want that specific desire.

  • Definition of Wantons and Wantlings

    • Wantons: Individuals who act based purely on their strongest first order desires without any reflection or recognition of these desires.
    • Wantlings: People who are tied to their strongest first order desire (much like very young children), and who never engage in reflective decision making about desires.
    • Frankfurt controversially states wantons are not persons—they lack the ability to make autonomous choices.

  • Moral Responsibility

    • Frankfurt’s theory poses the question of whether wantons can be morally responsible for their actions. He leans towards the idea that they are not:
    • Non-rational animals and young children are not morally responsible because they act based solely on desires, not through reflective decision making.
    • Homo sapiens who remain as wantons also miss moral responsibility.

  • Examples of Addiction

    • Frankfurt refers to different degrees of drug addicts:
    • The wanton drug addict: Actively responds only to physiological cravings without reflective thought.
    • A reflective drug addict: Enjoys the satisfaction of meeting cravings while consciously endorsing the craving, potentially allowing for moral responsibility as they act knowingly.

  • Frankfurt vs. Chisholm

    • Chisholm's agent causation literature argues that agents act by intervening in a causally determined world:
    • An agent's action (e.g., using a stick to push a stone) can be free and not merely the outcome of physical deterministic forces.
    • Frankfurt critiques this perspective, arguing the existence of agent causation is unsubstantiated and fails to adequately differentiate human actions from those of animals.

Watson's Response to Frankfurt

  • Architecture of Desires vs. Reason

    • Watson critiques Frankfurt by proposing a different hierarchy that separates reason from desire.
    • Cites Plato:
    • For Plato, reason and desire are distinct faculties; reason plays a crucial role as it determines values, which in turn guide actions.

  • Jean- Jacques Rousseau and David Hume Viewpoints

    • Hume argues reason is merely instrumental to desire; it only helps plan how to achieve desired goals.
    • Plato argues that values provide reasons for actions, indicating that reason plays a fundamental role in motivation rather than mere desire.

  • Distinction Between Judgment and Desire

    • Watson emphasizes that when one judges something as good, that judgment serves as a guide for motivation, differing from the immediate reaction of desire which is blind.

  • Philosophical Implications

    • The importance of values enhances the understanding of moral responsibility as they provide reasons for actions.
    • Differentiates the influence of temporary desires on evaluations and how one can judge an action's worth apart from the immediate influence of desires.

Further Considerations

  • Iterative Problem of Desires

    • Challenges the potential infinite regress in second-order desires:
    • Watson questions how higher-order desires can gain special status over others and how they are not merely arbitrary.
    • Emphasizes that moral judgments often transcend mere hierarchical desires and mattering more about the overarching existence of reasons to act.

  • Critique of Frankfurt’s Model

    • Conclusion: By aligning practical judgments with first-order desires to form second-order volitions, emphasis shifts from hierarchical structure of desires to the inherent values motivating actions.

Class Recap

  • Monday Class Structure

    • Will hold a session for open Q&A based on the PowerPoint and reading material.
    • Encourage students to prepare questions to facilitate discussion.

  • Next Steps

    • Review PowerPoint study guide over the weekend.
    • Come prepared for further discussions on the material.