I pursued these questions out of curiosity about some musings of a supervisor at first, but was later very grateful that I did. It is said that a fool can ask more questions than a wise man can answer. When a wise man like Michael Golby asked the questions, I think this particular fool was well advised to try to find some answers. There are genuine difficulties with dismissing biologistic theories in favour of cognitive ones, as I did perhaps too briskly in Chapter One. I shall deal with these after trying to establish criteria for a satisfactory cognitive theory.
Action involves an agent, and agency implies intention, purpose.
This is as Taylor and others have noticed also true of even the extraordinary language of behaviourists. But philosophers whose job it is to carry out just this task have also attempted to prune away the mental realm from explanation. We must look deeper. So, two people going for a drink at the Clifton Arms can be challenged about their reason for going there. I would guess that they would reply 'because we want a drink' or if they were feeling cheekier might reply 'because that's where they sell drinks'.