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.

Self-determination and Moral Responsibility

Strawson’s Account of Morality and its Implications for Central Themes in ‘Freedom and Resentment’

For Whom Does Determinism Undermine Moral Responsibility? Surveying the Conditions for Free Will Across Cultures

Self-determination Theory:A Positive Perspective on Personaliy

Fundamental Questions about Responsibility

On Free Will and Moral Shame

Self-Blame and Moral Responsibility

Artificial Agents in Natural Moral Communities: A Brief Clarification

Civic Responsibility:Logical Premise and Political Reasoning

New Consideration on Relationship between Determinism and Freewill

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

Folk Intuitions About Free Will and Moral Responsibility: Evaluating the Combined Effects of Misunderstandings About Determinism and Motivated Cognition

Moral Responsibility for AI Systems

Ibsen'S Dialectic Of Freedom And Responsibility

The Relevance of Alternate Possibilities for Moral Responsibility for Actions and Omissions

Forgiveness and Moral Development

Internal Reasons and Ethical Life

A Study on the Connotation and Its Understanding of College Students' Responsibility Identity

Responsibility in Extensive Form Games

Kantian Autonomy and Contemporary Ideas of Autonomy

Moral Knowledge and Ethic Objectivity