Abstract

In this paper I give some reasons why akratic action is such a puzzling problem. One of the reasons is that it is not clear which everyday phenomenon the term of art ‘akrasia’ refers to. I argue that we should take cases in which the person acts determinedly and wholeheartedly against her better judgement as core cases of akrasia. Acting foolishly is a case in point of this kind of akrasia. It is a better example than acting weakly. Subsequently I defend the Davidsonian solution to the problem of akrasia against the objection that it cannot explain cases of last ditch akrasia. The gist of my argument is that there is a way of accommodating Davidson's inferential break view to the problem of last ditch akrasia by taking a more dynamic view on intention than usual in action theory