10 Oct 08
Originally posted by diskamylI would say that "what I am to do" means that what I plan to do or have intentions to do.
can anyone tell me, as clearly as possible please, the difference between "what I am to do" and "what I will do".
the exact phrase is: "(...) what I am to do can never be reduced to, or discovered by scrutiny of the antecedents of, what I will do."
I would say that "what I will do" means what I will actually do which may or may not be the same as what I intended to do.
10 Oct 08
2 edits
Originally posted by diskamyl"What I am to do" seems to be synonymous with "what I am supposed to do" here. I'm not sure if the author is denying determinism (under which scrutinizing the antecedents of your action leads you to deduce the occurrence of said action), or simply commenting that moral obligation (where "I am supposed to do" would really mean "I ought to do" ) doesn't usually correspond with real actions.
can anyone tell me, as clearly as possible please, the difference between "what I am to do" and "what I will do".
the exact phrase is: "(...) what I am to do can never be reduced to, or discovered by scrutiny of the antecedents of, what I will do."
10 Oct 08
3 edits
Originally posted by PBE6hmm. what you've said comes down to mr.Hand's post, I think, because the author probably could've used "what I am supposed to do" as a synonim for "what I plan/intend to do" here.
"What I am to do" seems to be synonymous with "what I am supposed to do" here. I'm not sure if the author is denying determinism (under which scrutinizing the antecedents of your action leads you to deduce the occurrence of said action), or simply commenting that moral obligation (where "I am supposed to do" would really me "I ought to do" ) doesn't usually correspond with real actions.
by the way, no, he does not deny determinism in general, he denies a specific type of determinism (just like "scrutinizing the antecedents of your action leads you to deduce the occurrence of said action" ), which is Humean.
and thanks of course.