> I'm surprised the pragmatist is so hung up on the idea of intent here.
Unlike the classical pragmatists, I'm not a consequentialist. And even the classical prags knewe that intent matters. It was Holmes who expressed the point memorablt in The Common Law, saying that even a dog knows the difference between kicked and being tripped over.
> It doesn't matter whether or not intentions "animate" a social
practice; the person is just as dead, intent or not.
It matters in two ways. From a consequentialsit point of view, intention matters because intentionl practices are more likely to achieve their ends. This should be obvious. The more we perfect auto travel, the fewer fatalities there will be, because fatalities are an undesired byproduct. The more we perfect abortion, the more lethal it would be, since death is the intended aim. Second, from a nonconsequentialist point of view, it matters to the evaluation of the act. That is why we treat negligent homicide differently from premeditated murder. It's worse to mean to kill than to do it carelessly.
> To say we should draw analytic distinctions
between abortion and highway fatalities because "nobody intended
the highway deaths" is to accept culturally dominant conceptions
of human behavior as a product on individual motives and intentions.
You say that like it's a bad thing. "Man makes his own history, although he does not make it as he pleases." Personally, I think that it's true that people act on what they think and want. You have a better story?
> To say I'm neglecting the issue of "intent", to me, is like saying
my analysis of dawn as a product of the earth's rotation is
defective because I don't use the common-sense, plausible
notion that dawn is literally the sun rising and moving around the
earth.
OK, so what is your deep scientific alaternative to the idea that beliefsa nd desires are important in explaining human behavior? Are you an elimininative materialist in the manner of Paul and Patricia Churchland? And even if you you, why do you think this is relevant to seriiosu political dicsussion?
> Perhaps Justin is simply pointing out that my argument will not be
effective to persuade many people in our society that abortion is
justifiable. I agree. But's that not really a defect in my
argument, for most important, creative, and useful ideas in
human history challenge culturally dominant values and knowledge.
There's no point in being different just to be different. If you have a better alternative that matters practically, trot it out. If not, you're wasting bandwidth.
jks
--------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <../attachments/20030202/b37bd34c/attachment.htm>