Paul Russell
- Published in print:
- 2008
- Published Online:
- May 2008
- ISBN:
- 9780195110333
- eISBN:
- 9780199872084
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195110333.003.0016
- Subject:
- Philosophy, History of Philosophy
This chapter considers Hume's views on the subject “of liberty and necessity” in light of the relevant debate(s) that situate and structure his own contribution in the Treatise (T, 2.3.1–2). The ...
More
This chapter considers Hume's views on the subject “of liberty and necessity” in light of the relevant debate(s) that situate and structure his own contribution in the Treatise (T, 2.3.1–2). The primary concern is to show that, contrary to the orthodox view, Hume's arguments on this subject are highly relevant to problems of religion as Hume and his contemporaries understood and debated them. More specifically, Hume's necessitarianism is both metaphysically and methodologically a core part of his entire (Hobbist) project to establish a secular, scientific account of moral life. Related to this, one of the central lessons of Hume's discussion of free will in the Treatise, as it concerns his more extended views about the nature and conditions of moral responsibility, is that these are issues that we can make sense of only within the fabric of human nature and human society.Less
This chapter considers Hume's views on the subject “of liberty and necessity” in light of the relevant debate(s) that situate and structure his own contribution in the Treatise (T, 2.3.1–2). The primary concern is to show that, contrary to the orthodox view, Hume's arguments on this subject are highly relevant to problems of religion as Hume and his contemporaries understood and debated them. More specifically, Hume's necessitarianism is both metaphysically and methodologically a core part of his entire (Hobbist) project to establish a secular, scientific account of moral life. Related to this, one of the central lessons of Hume's discussion of free will in the Treatise, as it concerns his more extended views about the nature and conditions of moral responsibility, is that these are issues that we can make sense of only within the fabric of human nature and human society.
Alfred R. Mele
- Published in print:
- 2003
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780195156171
- eISBN:
- 9780199833467
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/019515617X.003.0001
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Philosophy of Mind
Provides a preview of the book's four main parts: (1) “Motivation and Action”; (2) “Motivation and Normativity”; (3) “Strength and Control” (more precisely, motivational strength and self‐control); ...
More
Provides a preview of the book's four main parts: (1) “Motivation and Action”; (2) “Motivation and Normativity”; (3) “Strength and Control” (more precisely, motivational strength and self‐control); and (4) “Decision, Agency, and Belief.” The chapter also identifies popular theses in motivational psychology, identifies a central element of the causal theory of agency to be defended, and explains why behavioral flexibility is a mark of motivation.Less
Provides a preview of the book's four main parts: (1) “Motivation and Action”; (2) “Motivation and Normativity”; (3) “Strength and Control” (more precisely, motivational strength and self‐control); and (4) “Decision, Agency, and Belief.” The chapter also identifies popular theses in motivational psychology, identifies a central element of the causal theory of agency to be defended, and explains why behavioral flexibility is a mark of motivation.
Brian Bruya
- Published in print:
- 2015
- Published Online:
- September 2015
- ISBN:
- 9780262028431
- eISBN:
- 9780262323628
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- The MIT Press
- DOI:
- 10.7551/mitpress/9780262028431.003.0013
- Subject:
- Philosophy, General
In the philosophy of action, it is generally understood that action presupposes an agent performing or guiding the action. Action is also generally understood as distinct from the kind of motion that ...
More
In the philosophy of action, it is generally understood that action presupposes an agent performing or guiding the action. Action is also generally understood as distinct from the kind of motion that happens in nature. Together these common perspectives on action rule out both action without agency and natural action. And yet, there are times when action can seem qualitatively both natural and lacking a sense of agency. Recently, David Velleman, referring to work by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi and Zhuangzi, has considered the possibility of agency without agency. In this chapter, I build on Velleman’s work and posit the notion of self-organization (which in the natural sciences serves as the basis for many familiar kinds of motion in nature) to also serve as the basis for human behavior. If action is a variety of behavior, conceiving of human behavior as fundamentally an instance of self-organization unifies human action with nature from the beginning and allows us to conceptualize the possibility of human action without presupposing the necessity of agency. I go on to entertain three types of human behavior in which the sense of agency is significantly absent and which progressively qualify as action.Less
In the philosophy of action, it is generally understood that action presupposes an agent performing or guiding the action. Action is also generally understood as distinct from the kind of motion that happens in nature. Together these common perspectives on action rule out both action without agency and natural action. And yet, there are times when action can seem qualitatively both natural and lacking a sense of agency. Recently, David Velleman, referring to work by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi and Zhuangzi, has considered the possibility of agency without agency. In this chapter, I build on Velleman’s work and posit the notion of self-organization (which in the natural sciences serves as the basis for many familiar kinds of motion in nature) to also serve as the basis for human behavior. If action is a variety of behavior, conceiving of human behavior as fundamentally an instance of self-organization unifies human action with nature from the beginning and allows us to conceptualize the possibility of human action without presupposing the necessity of agency. I go on to entertain three types of human behavior in which the sense of agency is significantly absent and which progressively qualify as action.
Karen M. Hawkins
- Published in print:
- 2017
- Published Online:
- May 2018
- ISBN:
- 9780813054971
- eISBN:
- 9780813053424
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- University Press of Florida
- DOI:
- 10.5744/florida/9780813054971.003.0007
- Subject:
- History, American History: 20th Century
This chapter discusses the Office of Economic Opportunity’s shift away from local ideas. This primarily entailed OEO funding fewer projects originating from local people and instead pushing national ...
More
This chapter discusses the Office of Economic Opportunity’s shift away from local ideas. This primarily entailed OEO funding fewer projects originating from local people and instead pushing national emphasis programs, such as Head Start, designed by federal officials. Although congressional cuts to OEO’s budget in 1967 played a role, the federal campaign to standardize the types of programs within the nation’s Community Action Agencies was perhaps more in response to other factors. For one, there was growing congressional disapproval for the controversial (and sometimes violent) direction of some local community action groups. Additionally, there was a continuing belief within OEO that national-emphasis programs would be more effective in reaching those most in need than were programs conceived by local people, most of whom were not poor themselves.Less
This chapter discusses the Office of Economic Opportunity’s shift away from local ideas. This primarily entailed OEO funding fewer projects originating from local people and instead pushing national emphasis programs, such as Head Start, designed by federal officials. Although congressional cuts to OEO’s budget in 1967 played a role, the federal campaign to standardize the types of programs within the nation’s Community Action Agencies was perhaps more in response to other factors. For one, there was growing congressional disapproval for the controversial (and sometimes violent) direction of some local community action groups. Additionally, there was a continuing belief within OEO that national-emphasis programs would be more effective in reaching those most in need than were programs conceived by local people, most of whom were not poor themselves.
Kazuyo Tsuchiya
- Published in print:
- 2014
- Published Online:
- August 2015
- ISBN:
- 9780816681112
- eISBN:
- 9781452947945
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- University of Minnesota Press
- DOI:
- 10.5749/minnesota/9780816681112.003.0004
- Subject:
- Sociology, Social Movements and Social Change
This chapter explains how Los Angeles activist Opal C. Jones and other African American leaders insisted on the rights of the poor to participate in the Los Angeles War on Poverty by establishing the ...
More
This chapter explains how Los Angeles activist Opal C. Jones and other African American leaders insisted on the rights of the poor to participate in the Los Angeles War on Poverty by establishing the Economic Opportunity Federation (EOF) that provided opportunities for residents to join the Community Action Agency (CAA). The agency is a group of non-profit organizations established under the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 to fight America’s war on poverty. Jones used the antipoverty program as a way to politically confront Mayor Samuel Yorty and other government officials who sought to secure control of the antipoverty programs for personal interests, resulting in a crucial change in the political status of African American residents in Los Angeles.Less
This chapter explains how Los Angeles activist Opal C. Jones and other African American leaders insisted on the rights of the poor to participate in the Los Angeles War on Poverty by establishing the Economic Opportunity Federation (EOF) that provided opportunities for residents to join the Community Action Agency (CAA). The agency is a group of non-profit organizations established under the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 to fight America’s war on poverty. Jones used the antipoverty program as a way to politically confront Mayor Samuel Yorty and other government officials who sought to secure control of the antipoverty programs for personal interests, resulting in a crucial change in the political status of African American residents in Los Angeles.
Karen M. Hawkins
- Published in print:
- 2017
- Published Online:
- May 2018
- ISBN:
- 9780813054971
- eISBN:
- 9780813053424
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- University Press of Florida
- DOI:
- 10.5744/florida/9780813054971.003.0006
- Subject:
- History, American History: 20th Century
This chapter discusses the increased intervention from the Office of Economic Opportunity and the North Carolina Fund in Craven Operation Progress matters. Federal officials within both the OEO and ...
More
This chapter discusses the increased intervention from the Office of Economic Opportunity and the North Carolina Fund in Craven Operation Progress matters. Federal officials within both the OEO and the Department of Labor had begun to conclude, similarly to Fund staff, that local control of community action would never allow the types of social and institutional change they believed were necessary to meet the needs of the poor. From their perspective in Washington, D.C., too many businessmen, elected officials, and other power-structure types served on local boards. Moreover, these men and women were either incapable of making or unwilling to make the kinds of decisions likely to enhance the poor’s political influence or economic standing. Eventually, save for the rare instances in which the poor made up a majority of a Community Action Agency board, local community action experiments began to be seen as a roadblock to the War on Poverty’s goals of improving opportunities and justice for indigent populations (especially in the South, where many of the long-term poor were black). The executive director ultimately resigns following pressure from both groups to step down.Less
This chapter discusses the increased intervention from the Office of Economic Opportunity and the North Carolina Fund in Craven Operation Progress matters. Federal officials within both the OEO and the Department of Labor had begun to conclude, similarly to Fund staff, that local control of community action would never allow the types of social and institutional change they believed were necessary to meet the needs of the poor. From their perspective in Washington, D.C., too many businessmen, elected officials, and other power-structure types served on local boards. Moreover, these men and women were either incapable of making or unwilling to make the kinds of decisions likely to enhance the poor’s political influence or economic standing. Eventually, save for the rare instances in which the poor made up a majority of a Community Action Agency board, local community action experiments began to be seen as a roadblock to the War on Poverty’s goals of improving opportunities and justice for indigent populations (especially in the South, where many of the long-term poor were black). The executive director ultimately resigns following pressure from both groups to step down.
Karen M. Hawkins
- Published in print:
- 2017
- Published Online:
- May 2018
- ISBN:
- 9780813054971
- eISBN:
- 9780813053424
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- University Press of Florida
- DOI:
- 10.5744/florida/9780813054971.003.0001
- Subject:
- History, American History: 20th Century
This chapter introduces Craven Operation Progress, the nation’s first rural Community Action Agency (CAA), and how its experiences help to add to the standard narrative of the War on Poverty.
This chapter introduces Craven Operation Progress, the nation’s first rural Community Action Agency (CAA), and how its experiences help to add to the standard narrative of the War on Poverty.