Skip to main content

The Contradictory Aims of Action Theory

Comments on I. Thalberg

  • Chapter
  • 223 Accesses

Part of the book series: Theory and Decision Library ((TDLU,volume 43))

Abstract

Why seek a theory of action? There are, I think, two general motivating aims. Each has a long and familiar history within our intellectual traditions. I shall suggest that they are in tension, even contradiction with one another. Professor Thalberg’s admirable paper, in my view, illustrates this particularly well. I shall argue that pursuing the one subverts the pursuit of the other. I shall also argue for abandoning the first, the better to fulfil the second.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. Notably among ‘methodological individualists’.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Parfit, D.: 1984, Reasons and Persons. Oxford: Clarendon Press, p. 275.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Hobbes, Thomas: Elements of Philosophy: the first section concerning Body, I, vi, 2.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Hobbes, Thomas: Preface to the English translation of De Cive. See on this aspect of Hobbes’s thought and its historical background, Watkins J. W. N.: 1965, Hobbes’s System of Ideas, London: Hutchinson, Parts III and I V.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Taylor C.: 1979, ‘Atomism’, in: Kontos, A. (ed.), Powers, Possessions and Freedom. Essays in Honor of C. B. Macpherson, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, pp. 60–61.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Homans George C.: 1967, The Nature of Social Science, New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, p. 106. For a similar argument, cited approvingly by Homans, see Barth, F.: 1966, ‘Models of Social Organisation’, Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, Occasional Paper no. 23.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Homans, ibid., pp. 85, 86.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Berelson, B. (ed.): 1963, The Behavioral Sciences Today, New York: Harper Torch-books, p. 3.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Locke, D.: this volume, p. 97.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Maclntyre, Alasdair: 1981, After Virtue. A Study in Moral Theory, London: Duckworth, p. 195.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Ibid.,p. 192.

    Google Scholar 

  12. See ibid., p. 199.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Geertz, C.: 1973, ‘Thick Description: Towards an Interpretive Theory of Culture’, in The Interpretation of Cultures. Selected Essays by Clifford Geertz, New York: Basic Books, pp. 15, 9.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Ibid., p. 9.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1985 D. Reidel Publishing Company

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Lukes, S. (1985). The Contradictory Aims of Action Theory. In: Seebass, G., Tuomela, R. (eds) Social Action. Theory and Decision Library, vol 43. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-5263-8_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-5263-8_3

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-010-8824-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-009-5263-8

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics