Two Philosophies of Needs

McLeod, SK (2015) Two Philosophies of Needs. Polish Journal of Philosophy, 9 (1). 33 - 50. ISSN 1897-1652

There is a more recent version of this item available.

Text
Two_Philosophies_of_Needs_ELEMENTS.pdf - Author Accepted Manuscript
Access to this file is embargoed until Unspecified.
Download (352kB)

Abstract

Instrumentalists about need believe that all needs are instrumental, i.e., ontologically dependent upon ends, goals or purposes. Absolutists view some needs as non-instrumental. The aims of this article are: clearly to characterize the instrumentalism/absolutism debate that is of concern (mainly §1); to establish that both positions have recent and current adherents (mainly §1); to bring what is, in comparison with prior literature, a relatively high level of precision to the debate, employing some hitherto neglected, but important, insights (passim); to show, on grounds not previously to the fore in the literature, that insofar as instrumentalism’s advocates have provided arguments for the position, these are unsound (§2); to argue against instrumentalism using a new dilemma concerning whether ‘end’, ‘goal’ and ‘purpose’ are interpreted in a mentalistic manner (§3); to elucidate the implications of the needs/need-satisfiers and preconditions/means distinctions for the debate (§4).

Item Type:	Article
Additional Information:	## TULIP Type: Articles/Papers (Journal) ##
Uncontrolled Keywords:	absolute needs, ends, goals, instrumental needs, needs, purposes
Depositing User:	Symplectic Admin
Date Deposited:	02 Jun 2016 09:13
Last Modified:	19 Jan 2023 07:36
DOI:	10.5840/pjphil2015912
URI:	https://livrepository.liverpool.ac.uk/id/eprint/3001479