Talk:Intention

message: I would like to add this: 
In deontological ethics the intent of an act is the way in which a maxim is supposed to be executed. Immanuel Kant uses this in his categorical imperative, for instance, in the sense that an act is only moral if one can at the same time will that this maxim would become a universal law.
:"Handle nur nach derjenigen Maxime, durch die du zugleich wollen kannst, dass sie ein allgemeines Gesetz werde"Immanuel Kant, Kritik der Reinen Vernunft (first edition 1781, second edition 1787).
:External Links
:*Online works of Immanuel Kant on Gutenberg
:References
:
::Since no response came I added the section, references and external links. --Faust (talk) 22:30, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intention in Philosophy 

message: There is a mention of related terms. The term that is mention is intention. It is, however, called intension. This would warrant a new page and a removal of this piece of the article here.
--Faust (talk) 22:51, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  intention/Intension 

message: I'm going to do a major rewrite soon. 
ELE427 (talk) 06:25, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewrite 

message: as far as I can tell the entire influence of Aristotle on the theory of human action has been erased from wikipedia. In particular, here there is no mention of aristotle, the page unintended consequences claims the notion was coined by Thomas Merton, the page on Human action cycle claims it was formed by Dan Norman. I cant find the simple subcategories of action I was taught in catholic school decades ago and that were attributed to Aristotle and Aquinas, that are in fact the basis of criminal law rational choice theory (criminology). Those stages were roughly: motivation precedes intention precedes action precedes consequence, precedes evaluation. This doctrine is probably hundreds if not thousands of years old-- how have its roots been lost?Mrdthree (talk) 00:33, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Aristotle/Aquinas eliminated from wikipedia?

message: The lead doesn't include the deliberate neglection of actions despite criminal negligence being a thing.  Is this an omission or am I misunderstanding something? - Shiftchange (talk) 23:12, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  What about neglect 

message: Everything happens for a reason says the personocrat / bias thinker who deems self-evident the values and goals of persons (yes, also values; especially in Asian religions and divine impersonal field which fulfil part of the values related to personhood; otherwise we have scientific atheism and not religion)
* in Greek: https://ibb.co/xsfmrP5  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:587:4105:CA38:B9AA:40FA:1225:A02E (talk) 23:05, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Personal opinion by IPv6 

message: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chris troutman (talk • contribs) 19:47, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Course assignment 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Intent (disambiguation) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 03:03, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress