In Defense of Ambivalence and Alienation

Ambivalence and Self‐Deception: Reframing the Debate

“…Penn State University NOTES 1 'Ethical Consistency', in Williams (1976). 2 See, for a sample, Benson (2005), Blackburn (2014), Gunnarsson (2014), Marino (2011), Moran, Poltera (2010), Rorty (2010), Schechtman (2014), Schramme (2014), Velleman (2006), and Wolf (2002.…”

“…See, for a sample, Benson (), Blackburn (), Gunnarsson (), Marino (), Moran, Poltera (), Rorty (), Schechtman (), Schramme (), Velleman (, ), and Wolf (2002). …”

Cares, Identification, and Agency Reductionism

“…Finally, if Gunnarsson is right, then the alienation constraint only fails to hold in cases of deep or radical ambivalence (Gunnarsson, , p. 25). The cases I consider below can all be interpreted so that they do not involve such radical ambivalence and so the worries raised by Gunnarsson will not touch the cases I develop that raise problems for care‐based identification reductionism.…”

“…It is also for this reason that the case of the underground man is not (or at least for my purposes need not be understood as) a case of radical ambivalence, as Gunnarsson understands it. An agent who is radically ambivalent tries but fails to come to a conclusive all‐things‐considered evaluation of what to do, where an ‘all‐things‐considered evaluation with respect to two possible courses of action expresses which course [the agent] favors in light of all of her attitudes, including attitudes of judgment and emotional attitudes’ (Gunnarsson, , p. 14). The underground man, we can assume, does come to an all‐things‐considered evaluation: namely, that it is best to give up his petty care.…”

“…Second, one might worry that Kevin's case is a case of deep ambivalence precisely because it involves a conflict about what Kevin judges to be best and what he most cares about. However, Gunnarsson defines deep or radical ambivalence in such a way that it necessarily involves ‘inherent’ conflict between attitudes, where this means ‘that the one course of action amounts to the promotion of certain values and the other course of action amounts to the undermining of the promotion of these very values’ (, p. 14). Gunnarsson illustrates his idea of inherent conflict with the fascinating case of Donnie Brasco, who is an undercover FBI agent who has infiltrated the mafia.…”