Advertisement

Doing and Causing

  • David-Hillel Ruben
Chapter

Abstract

Does the LHS of (PT) entail its RHS? When a person acts (and the action verb is an ergative verb), isn’t it trivially true that he causes, i.e., that he is a cause of, the event intrinsic to the action, trivially true that he brings that very event about? Are all doings causings even if not all causings are doings? It is this question that this chapter addresses.

I do hold that the LHS of (PT) entails the RHS. But should we understand the LHS and the RHS of (CA) as being about two particulars or as using two descriptions of a single particular? I describe one-particularism as the view that takes the second of those options. I strengthen the case for one-particularism by looking at the idea of Cambridge changes (and hence Cambridge actions). I examine two obvious counter-arguments to one-particularism: (a) that, on an action chain, an action doesn’t cause another action, but it only causes the event that is intrinsic to its successor action on the chain, if it has one; (b) Alvin Goldman’s view, shared by many others, that would imply that one-particularism gets the time of an action wrong.

Bibliography

  1. Alvarez, Maria. 1999. Actions and Events: Some Semantical Considerations. Ratio, new series XII (3): 213–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bennett, Jonathan. 1973. Shooting, Killing, and Dying. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 2: 315–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bratman, M. 1978. Individuation and Action. Philosophical Studies 33: 367–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Clarke, Randolph. 1995. Agents, Causes, Events. Edited by Timothy O’Connor, 201–215. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. ———. 2010. Skilled Activity and the Causal Theory of Action. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 80 (3): 523–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Davidson, Donald. 1967 (1980). The Logical Form of Action Sentences, reprinted in his Essays on Actions and Events. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 105–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. ———. 1970 (1980). Mental Events, reprinted in his Essays on Actions and Events. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 207–225.Google Scholar
  8. Davis, L. 1979. Theory of Action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  9. Dummett, Michael. 1973. Frege: Philosophy of Language. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
  10. Geach, Peter. 1969. God and the Soul. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  11. ———. 1981. Logic Matters. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  12. Ginet, Carl. 1990. On Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Goldman, Alvin. 1970. A Theory of Human Action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  14. Haack, Susan. 1978. Philosophy of Logic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hornsby, Jennifer. 1980. Actions. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  16. ———. 2011. Actions in their Circumstances. In Essays on Anscombe’s Intention, ed. Anton Ford, Jennifer Hornsby, and Frederick Stoutland, 105–127. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  17. ———. 2012. Actions and Activities. Philosophical Issues 22: 233–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kenny, Anthony. 1963. Action, Emotion and Will. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  19. Kim, J. 1973. Causes and Counterfactuals. Journal of Philosophy 70 (17): 570–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. ———. 1974. Noncausal Connections. Nous 8: 41–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. ———. 1976. “Events as Property Exemplifications”. In Action Theory, ed. M. Brand and D. Walton, 159–177. Dordrecht: Reidel. Reprinted in Supervenience and Mind: Selected Philosophical Essays, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993, pp. 33–52.Google Scholar
  22. Levin, Beth. 1993. English Verb Classes and Alternation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  23. Lombard, Lawrence. 2003. The Cambridge Solution to the Time of a Killing. Philosophia 31 (1–2): 93–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mackie, David. 1997. The Individuation of Action. The Philosophical Quarterly 47 (186): 38–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Munsat, Stanley. 1969. What is a Process? American Philosophical Quarterly 6 (1): 79–83.Google Scholar
  26. Parsons, Terence. 1994. Events in the Semantics of English. Boston: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  27. Ruben, David-Hillel. 1990 (1992). Explaining Explanation. London: Routledge. Second edition (2012), Paradigm Publishers, Boulder, CO.Google Scholar
  28. ———. 1995. Mental Overpopulation and the Problem of Action. Journal of Philosophical Research 20: 511–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. ———. 2003. Action & Its Explanation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Steward, Helen. 2012. Actions as Processes. Philosophical Perspectives 26 (1): 373–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. ———. 2013. Processes, Continuants, and Individuals. Mind 122 (487): 781–812.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. ———. 2015. What is a Continuant? Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volume LXXXIX: 109–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1953. Philosophical Investigations. Translated by G.E.M. Anscombe. New York: Macmillan Company.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • David-Hillel Ruben
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyUniversity of LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations