Amir Šulić (USI)

How should action theory describe acts that are intelligible as breaches of a norm without being either corrigible errors or ratifiable innovations? Focusing on cases such as deliberate failure, principled refusal, and non-permitted novelty, I argue that influential accounts of agency—Anscombean, practical-knowledge, and control-based views among them—tend to privilege successful performance, correction, rational control, or uptake as markers of intelligible agency. This leaves underdescribed a distinct normative status: actions that are recognisable, criticisable, and answerable within a shared practice while remaining unauthorised by the standing norms they breach, independently of whether they are later corrected, ratified, or neither.

Full presentation on the FTL website.