Philosopher: An event is intentional if it is a human action performed on the basis of a specific motivation. ██ █████ ██ ██████ ██ ██ ██ ███ █████████ ██ ███ █████ ██ █ ████████ ██████████ ███ ██ ██ ███ ███████████ ██ ██████ ████████ ██████████
The philosopher gives us two principles that describe events:
(1) If a human performs an action and it has a specific purpose, then that action is intentional.
(2) If an event has no specific purpose and cannot be explained by normal physical processes, then it is random. 
We must find the correct application of these principles. We can support conclusions over when an event is intentional and when it is random.
If a human performs an action with a purpose, we can conclude it’s intentional.
If an event has no purpose and can’t be explained through normal physical processes, we can conclude it’s random.
Which one of the following ██████████ ████████ ████ ███████ ██ ███ █████████████ █████████
Tarik left the ████ █████████ ██ ███ ███████ ████████ ███ ██ ███ ███ ██ ██ ██ ███ █████ ██ █ ████████ ███████████ ██████████ ███ █████ █████████ ██ ███ ███████ ███████ ███ █ ██████ ██████
Wrong trigger. Tarik’s action satisfied part of the sufficient condition of premise (2) as it had no purpose, but we don’t know if it could be explained by physical processes.
Ellis tore the ████████ ████ ██ █████ ██ ████ ███ █████████ ███ ███ ████████ ███ ██████ █████████████ ███████ █████ █████ ██ ███ █████ ██ █ ████████ ███████████ ███████ ███ ████████ ████ ███ ██ ███████████ ██████
(B) correctly activates the sufficient conditions of premise (1). Opening the envelope was a human action, and Ellis performed it with a purpose, so we can correctly conclude it was an intentional event.
Judith's hailing a ███ ██████████ █ ██████ ██ ███ ████ █████ ███ █████████ ███ ██████ ██ ███████ ███ ███ ██ ███ █████ ██ █ ████████ ███████████ ██ ███ ████████ ████████ ██████████ ███ ██ ███████████ ██████
Wrong conclusion. Judith performed an action with a purpose—getting a cab—so we can conclude that her hailing the cab was an intentional event. We have no clue if the driver intended to become distracted, so we can’t conclude the distraction was an intentional event.
Yasuko continued to ███████ █████████ ██████████ ███ ████ ████ ███ ███ ███████ ████ ███ █ █████ ███████ ███ ██ ███ ███ █████████ ██ ███ █████ ██ █ ████████ ███████████ ██████████ ███ █████████ ███ █ ██████ ██████
Wrong trigger. To conclude that an action is random, we need to know it can’t be explained by normal physical processes. We have no clue whether Yasuko’s breathing could be explained by these processes, so we can’t conclude that her breathing was random.
Henry lost his ████ ██ ███ ██████ ███ ███████ ██ ███████ ███ ██████ ███ █████████ ████ ███ █ █████ ██████ ███ ██ ███████████ ██ ██████ ████████ ██████████ ██ ██ ███ ██ ███████████ ██████
Wrong trigger. To conclude that an action is intentional, we must know that a human performed it with a specific purpose. We don’t know if Henry intended to drop the wrench, so we can’t conclude this action was intentional.
Answer five questions and we'll estimate your score.
It takes about five minutes.
Take the free diagnostic