Experts and Deviants: The Story of Agentive Control

67Citations
Citations of this article
44Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

This essay argues that current theories of action fail to explain agentive control because they have left out a psychological capacity central to control: attention. This makes it impossible to give a complete account of the mental antecedents that generate action. By investigating attention, and in particular the intention-attention nexus, we can characterize the functional role of intention in an illuminating way, explicate agentive control so that we have a uniform explanation of basic cases of causal deviance in action as well as other defects of agency (distraction), explain cases of skilled agency and sharpen questions about the role of thought in agency. This provides for a different orientation in the theory of action.

References Powered by Scopus

Controlled and automatic human information processing: I. Detection, search, and attention

4036Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Computational principles of movement neuroscience

1549Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Origins of Objectivity

997Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Intentions: The dynamic hierarchical model revisited

51Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Do we reflect while performing skillful actions? Automaticity, control, and the perils of distraction

44Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

The shape of agency: Control, action, skill, knowledge

43Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Wu, W. (2016). Experts and Deviants: The Story of Agentive Control. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 93(1), 101–126. https://doi.org/10.1111/phpr.12170

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 18

60%

Professor / Associate Prof. 6

20%

Researcher 5

17%

Lecturer / Post doc 1

3%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Philosophy 16

57%

Psychology 8

29%

Computer Science 2

7%

Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2

7%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free