论知善行恶

On Knowing the Better and Doing the Worse

应当和促动之间的关系,有外在主义和内在主义之分。大致来讲,外在主义主张,一个人知道方式A比B好(即知道应当做行动A)但未必有动机支持做行动A。而内在主义主张,一个人知道应当做行动A就是有一个确凿理由支持做行动A。彻底的或极端的内在主义混淆了“有一个确凿理由”的两种意义,即混淆了“有一个确凿的好理由”和“有一个确凿的有力理由”(或“有一个必然的现行理由”)。这种混淆导致了极端内在主义者认为,一个人知道应当做行动A就必然会做行动A而非行动B,从而没有知善却蓄意行恶的事情。相比之下,有一种内在主义没有这种混淆,它主张“知道应当做什么”未必是“有一个确凿的有力理由”,从而并非出于冲动的知善行恶是可能的。

A distinction can be drawn between externalism and internalism in the case of the relation between ought and motivation.Roughly,externalism is the view that a person knows course A is better than B,i.e.he ought to do action A,and yet does not necessarily have a motive for doing A.And internalism argues that to know he ought to do A is to have a conclusive reason for doing A.Radical or extreme internalism confuses two senses of“having a conclusive reason”,namely“having a conclusively good reason”and“having a conclusively powerful reason”(or“having a necessarily prevailing reason”).The confusion leads the extreme internalist to think that a person who knows he ought to do A will necessarily do A rather than B,and,hence,that there is no such a thing as knowing the better yet deliberately doing the worse.By contrast,there is a form of internalism which,without the confusion,argues that to know what ought to do would not necessarily be to have a conclusively powerful reason,and concludes that it is possible to know the better and do the worse not from impulse.