Thank you for your views on the topic Book!
It does make sense to see "trying" as realizing an intent. At the same time specially in the human experience, "trying" is something we say a lot that usually means we're going to fail. I'd like to think, based on the replies and my understanding, that the stronger the intent is the bigger the likelihood of an action is. The common thought about achieving your goals would support this; the more/harder you try, the more likely it is that you succeed. (See how I slipped the word "try" in there even though it's supposed to be under the microscope here.)
My point of view on this topic was originally purely metaphysical and it involved mostly "trying". So far I don't think anyone has given their thoughts on the
existence of trying. Perhaps the question is pointless itself, my original question was poor(it was) or maybe Yoda has already told the answer. The real reason why this interests me is another question; What does it mean if trying doesn't exist? Where does it lead us?
It's a common thought that there is a world out there beyond our minds and we like to think that we are a part of that world. What I find interesting is that we live in this world seemingly on natures/the worlds terms but at the same time we need our own "made up" rules too. One of those rules could be the concept of "trying". It doesn't really exist in the world itself, but it's a very useful concept nonetheless. Why does this matter then? I think this questioning of "trying" reveals only one of those concepts that we could blindly use our whole lives and never realize that the world doesn't work that way after all. To humans trying can be a damaging mindset most likely caused by not believing in oneself. If you think you can't do anything, you might always
try instead of
do. In a way I find a person doing their best better than them trying, because there you don't deny the possibility of failure either but it has more hope in it.
To me this "metaphysics of 'trying'" relies on the belief that there is the world itself and then in that world us humans and also the belief that human experience is somewhat different from the phenomena of the world itself. If you don't find these beliefs reasonable/justified then talking about the existence of "trying" in reality itself is most likely pointless.
Now a little more about intentions (goes a bit off topic):
Action/effect is not always the result of intent. — Book273
Now that we know this, I'd like to carve a more specific version of the original question about the relation between act and intent. Let's look at the actions that we actually make happen. Is there an intent behind every act? I guess to ask if we ever do anything for another reason than an intent is to ask if we ever do something for no
purpose at all. Like the "late from work example" shows, even though you driving over a deer isn't what you were intending to do, there still was an intent behind the act: don't be late. I've used the word purpose here to connect the terms "intent" and "meaning". I guess to put it more clearly:
Can there be an act without intent?
It's also fascinating how "intentions" seem to have a quite clear connection to moral norms;
Intentions are based on an anticipated or desired course of action. — Book273
After all, a desired course of action is often determined by what we think is right in an ethical way. Most of our intentions could develop in relation to other humans and from what we learn kind of like hand in hand with moral norms. Many of the acts that we carry out affect other people too, so how couldn't our intentions be affected by the moral norms that are in our culture. Then again there are criminals who've seemingly had malicious intentions so it's not like you automatically get good intentions from your society.
What to take away from this:
- I suppose "trying" has been figured out (nothing is truly figured out ever in philosophy don't worry I know that)
- Can there be an act without any intent?