Abstract:In his discussion on action, Searle combines intentionality with action closely, pointing out that intentionality causes action and action satisfies intentionality. To analyze the structure of action, he differentiates prior intention from action (including intention-in-action and bodily movement). Prior intention refers to action and the whole action is its intentional object. But intention-in-action only refers to bodily movement. Despite this difference, prior intention and intention-in-action are causally selfreferential. The claim that intentions are causally self-referential means that it is part of the content of a prior intention that it causes the corresponding action by producing a representation of its own conditions of satisfaction. Similarly, it is part of the content of an intention-in-action that it causes a body movement by producing a presentation of its own conditions of satisfaction. With these, prior intention causes intention-in-action which in turn causes body movement. Conversely, body movement satisfies intention-in-action which in turn satisfies prior intention. It is mental causation that shapes the relationship between intentionality and action. It is noted that the logical form of the explanation of human behavior in terms of mental causation is radically different from the standard forms of causation. That is to say that mental causation isn’t sufficient and cannot determine action. An essential feature of mental causation is that the mental state itself functions causally in the production of its own conditions of satisfaction or its conditions of satisfaction function causally in its production. Because of these, we should postulate an irreducible Non-human Self. Besides body and experience which Hume attributed to the self, the Non-human Self contains a conscious agent.Searle’s philosophy of action, in our analysis, demonstrates a Kantian question: how is voluntary action possible? It includes three sub-class questions: What is the relationship between intentionality and action? Why does the relationship exist in them? What does the relationship depend on? Searle gives us his own answers: intentionality causes action and it is satisfied by action; the relationship results from mental causation; the relationship must depend on a Non-human Self. The method of this survey avoids the defects of introspectionism and behaviorism, prompting the discussion of action.

Searle:A Critical Examination

Conversation,Mind,and Reality:The Three Dimensions of Searle's Speech Act Theory

The Intentional Structure of Collective Action

Unfair to Social Facts: John Searle and the Logic of Objectivity

Beyond Substantiality and Illusion: the Problem of the Self in Buddhist Constructivism

Searle’s Critique of Heidegger’s “Perspectivism”

Performativity or Discourse? An Interview with John Searle

THE LOGICAL STRUCTURE OF LANGUAGE: FROM SPEECH ACTS TO ‎THE ESTABLISHMENT OF SOCIAL REALITY IN THE PHILOSOPHY OF ‎‎"JEAN SEARLE"‎

Hacia una ontología de la realidad social desde la filosofía de John Searle

Evolution of the Concept of “Personal”and the Spirit of the Age——From“the Abstract Person”to“Realistic Individual”and “Civil Society”

How Could Collectivity Possible?——Review of Gilberts Plural Subject Theory

Derrida and Searl

Context, Intention and Meaning——Comments on Searle’sMeaning Theory of Intentionality

The Development of Language Philosophy and Mental Philosophy in the 20th Century——Take Searle As an Example

The logic of Searle’s Chinese room argument

Action, Causation and Self: Some Remarks on Searle’s Philosophy of Action

The Pseudorealization Fallacy and the Chinese Room Argument

The Mind——Body Problem and Searle's Biological Naturalism

Unconsciousness Is Really No Consciousness:Thinking of Connection between Consciousness and Intentionality Caused by Searle's Connection Principle

A estrutura da autoconsciência na filosofia da mente de John Searle

Five Diagnoses of the Logical Structure of Searle's Chinese Room Argument