Keyboard Shortcuts?f

×
  • →Next step
  • ←Previous step
  • ↓Skip this slide
  • ↑Previous slide
  • mShow slide thumbnails
  • nShow notes
  • hShow handout latex source
  • NShow talk notes latex source

Click here and press the right key for the next slide.

(This may not work on mobile or ipad. You can try using chrome or firefox, but even that may fail. Sorry.)

also ...

Press the left key to go backwards (or swipe right)

Press n to toggle whether notes are shown (or add '?notes' to the url before the #)

Press m or double tap to slide thumbnails (menu)

Press ? at any time to show the keyboard shortcuts

 

Why Investigate Team Reasoning?

How to create an aggregate subject?

1. self-representation (Pettit, 2014; done earlier)

2. team reasoning?

There is further, alternative motivation for considering team reasoning. Some have claimed that it will provide us with a ground-level account of shared intention, and thereby of shared agency ...

‘The key difference between the two kinds of intention is not a property of the intentions themselves, but of the modes of reasoning by which they are formed.
Thus, an analysis which starts with the intention has already missed what is distinctively collective about it’

(Gold & Sugden, 2007)
So these researchers, unlike Pettit and List are aiming to capture a basic form of shared agency rather than to build on a prior account of shared intention. But there’s more ...

‘collective intentions are the product of a distinctive mode of practical reasoning, team reasoning, in which agency is attributed to groups.’

(Gold & Sugden, 2007)
So these researchers are aiming to build a kind of aggregate subject.
They think, in a nutshell, that aggregate subjects are not only a consequence of self-reflection, but can also arise through (a special mode of) reasoning about what to do.

Gold and Sugden (2006)

But what is team reasoning? I’m so glad you asked ...

‘somebody team reasons if she works out the best possible feasible combination of actions for all the members of her team, then does her part in it.’

(Bacharach, 2006, p. 121)

Bacharach (2006, p. 121)

These are the questions you would want to answer if you were going to pursue team reasoning.

1. What is team reasoning?

2. In what sense does team reasoning give rise to aggregate agents?

3. How might team reasoning be used in constructing a theory of shared agency?