Self-control and planning: a reply to Williamson
In Timothy Luke Williamson’s commentary on my article “Micromanagement and Poor Self-Control,” Williamson casts my focus on managerial failures in certain cases of poor self-control “as an especially fruitful tool for addressing problems of poor self-control”; but he suggests that the cases of poor...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Erasmus journal for philosophy and economics 2024-07, Vol.17 (1), p.266-271 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 271 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 266 |
container_title | Erasmus journal for philosophy and economics |
container_volume | 17 |
creator | Andreou, Chrisoula |
description | In Timothy Luke Williamson’s commentary on my article “Micromanagement and Poor Self-Control,” Williamson casts my focus on managerial failures in certain cases of poor self-control “as an especially fruitful tool for addressing problems of poor self-control”; but he suggests that the cases of poor self-control that I view as cases of managerial failure also involve control by a foreign force, in accordance with the “foreign force paradigm,” which I claim is off base in the cases on which I focus. Although I cannot get into Williamson’s entire interesting and elaborate argument, I here question The Weak Planning Perspective, which plays a key role in Williamson’s critical response, with the aim of addressing the issues he raises and shedding some light on why and how our views diverge. |
doi_str_mv | 10.23941/ejpe.v17i1.877 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>econis_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_23941_ejpe_v17i1_877</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>189941990X</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1387-92786a5efb053189dbe1ff7bfd6869ae6cd5cdc73ae48687ed7312820024b9443</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpNj09LxDAUxIMouK6exVu_QLtJ0-a9d5TFf7DgQRf2FtLkRbrUtjQi-O2tu4KeZg4zw_yEuFayKDVVasX7kYtPBa0qEOBELBSCyUkSnv7z5-Iipb2UhqCuF-LmhbuY-6H_mIYuc33Ixs71fdu_XYqz6LrEV7-6FNv7u9f1Y755fnha325yrzRCTiWgcTXHRtZaIYWGVYzQxGDQkGPjQ-2DB-24QoPAAbQqsZSyrBqqKr0Uq-Oun4aUJo52nNp3N31ZJe2BzP6Q2QOZncnmRnZs8Py7TX95pDlNJHf6GxMgTA8</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Self-control and planning: a reply to Williamson</title><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>EBSCOhost Business Source Complete</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Andreou, Chrisoula</creator><creatorcontrib>Andreou, Chrisoula</creatorcontrib><description>In Timothy Luke Williamson’s commentary on my article “Micromanagement and Poor Self-Control,” Williamson casts my focus on managerial failures in certain cases of poor self-control “as an especially fruitful tool for addressing problems of poor self-control”; but he suggests that the cases of poor self-control that I view as cases of managerial failure also involve control by a foreign force, in accordance with the “foreign force paradigm,” which I claim is off base in the cases on which I focus. Although I cannot get into Williamson’s entire interesting and elaborate argument, I here question The Weak Planning Perspective, which plays a key role in Williamson’s critical response, with the aim of addressing the issues he raises and shedding some light on why and how our views diverge.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1876-9098</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1876-9098</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.23941/ejpe.v17i1.877</identifier><language>eng</language><ispartof>Erasmus journal for philosophy and economics, 2024-07, Vol.17 (1), p.266-271</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,860,27903,27904</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Andreou, Chrisoula</creatorcontrib><title>Self-control and planning: a reply to Williamson</title><title>Erasmus journal for philosophy and economics</title><description>In Timothy Luke Williamson’s commentary on my article “Micromanagement and Poor Self-Control,” Williamson casts my focus on managerial failures in certain cases of poor self-control “as an especially fruitful tool for addressing problems of poor self-control”; but he suggests that the cases of poor self-control that I view as cases of managerial failure also involve control by a foreign force, in accordance with the “foreign force paradigm,” which I claim is off base in the cases on which I focus. Although I cannot get into Williamson’s entire interesting and elaborate argument, I here question The Weak Planning Perspective, which plays a key role in Williamson’s critical response, with the aim of addressing the issues he raises and shedding some light on why and how our views diverge.</description><issn>1876-9098</issn><issn>1876-9098</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpNj09LxDAUxIMouK6exVu_QLtJ0-a9d5TFf7DgQRf2FtLkRbrUtjQi-O2tu4KeZg4zw_yEuFayKDVVasX7kYtPBa0qEOBELBSCyUkSnv7z5-Iipb2UhqCuF-LmhbuY-6H_mIYuc33Ixs71fdu_XYqz6LrEV7-6FNv7u9f1Y755fnha325yrzRCTiWgcTXHRtZaIYWGVYzQxGDQkGPjQ-2DB-24QoPAAbQqsZSyrBqqKr0Uq-Oun4aUJo52nNp3N31ZJe2BzP6Q2QOZncnmRnZs8Py7TX95pDlNJHf6GxMgTA8</recordid><startdate>20240711</startdate><enddate>20240711</enddate><creator>Andreou, Chrisoula</creator><scope>OQ6</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20240711</creationdate><title>Self-control and planning</title><author>Andreou, Chrisoula</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1387-92786a5efb053189dbe1ff7bfd6869ae6cd5cdc73ae48687ed7312820024b9443</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Andreou, Chrisoula</creatorcontrib><collection>ECONIS</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Erasmus journal for philosophy and economics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Andreou, Chrisoula</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Self-control and planning: a reply to Williamson</atitle><jtitle>Erasmus journal for philosophy and economics</jtitle><date>2024-07-11</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>17</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>266</spage><epage>271</epage><pages>266-271</pages><issn>1876-9098</issn><eissn>1876-9098</eissn><abstract>In Timothy Luke Williamson’s commentary on my article “Micromanagement and Poor Self-Control,” Williamson casts my focus on managerial failures in certain cases of poor self-control “as an especially fruitful tool for addressing problems of poor self-control”; but he suggests that the cases of poor self-control that I view as cases of managerial failure also involve control by a foreign force, in accordance with the “foreign force paradigm,” which I claim is off base in the cases on which I focus. Although I cannot get into Williamson’s entire interesting and elaborate argument, I here question The Weak Planning Perspective, which plays a key role in Williamson’s critical response, with the aim of addressing the issues he raises and shedding some light on why and how our views diverge.</abstract><doi>10.23941/ejpe.v17i1.877</doi><tpages>6</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1876-9098 |
ispartof | Erasmus journal for philosophy and economics, 2024-07, Vol.17 (1), p.266-271 |
issn | 1876-9098 1876-9098 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_crossref_primary_10_23941_ejpe_v17i1_877 |
source | DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; EBSCOhost Business Source Complete; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals |
title | Self-control and planning: a reply to Williamson |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-23T01%3A42%3A31IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-econis_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Self-control%20and%20planning:%20a%20reply%20to%20Williamson&rft.jtitle=Erasmus%20journal%20for%20philosophy%20and%20economics&rft.au=Andreou,%20Chrisoula&rft.date=2024-07-11&rft.volume=17&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=266&rft.epage=271&rft.pages=266-271&rft.issn=1876-9098&rft.eissn=1876-9098&rft_id=info:doi/10.23941/ejpe.v17i1.877&rft_dat=%3Ceconis_cross%3E189941990X%3C/econis_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |