Title

What skill is not

Document Type

Article

Publication Date

1-1-2017

Abstract

A dispositional theory of skill, such as that defended by Stanley and Williamson (2016), might seem promising. Such a theory looks to provide a unified intellectualist account of skill reflecting insights from cognitive science and philosophy. I argue that any theory of the kind fails given that skill is broadly answerable to the will. A person may be characteristically disposed both against the exercise of her skill and against any associated intentional forming of knowledge. Clearly she does not cease thereby to be skilled. I consider four replies, none of which vindicate this kind of theory.

Volume

77

Issue

2

This document is currently not available here.

Published Version

Share

COinS