Intention and luck

Photo taken in Amersfoort, NL, on the Boogschutterplein

At the end of my last blog I raised the problem that often it is not easy to say whether a person performed an action or just did something. Of course, a part of the solution will depend on how you define “intention”, although it doesn’t guarantee a solution. In my PhD thesis I defined “intention” this way: The intention of an action is the answer to the question to what purpose or why the actor performed this action. Let me apply it to the case of Carl in my last blog:
Carl wants to kill his rich uncle because he wants to inherit his fortune. He believes that his uncle is home and drives towards his house. His desire to kill his uncle agitates him and he drives recklessly. On the way he hits and kills a pedestrian, who happens to be his uncle.
Carl killed his uncle because he drove recklessly and Carl had the intention to kill his uncle and if he could have done it this way, probably he would have done it. Moreover, that Carl drove recklessly was because he had the intention to kill his uncle. Nevertheless he did not kill his uncle then and there intentionally. Is the best answer to the problem then that what Carl did (in my sense) was killing his uncle and that this killing was not an action? Maybe, and probably a judge would judge that way, but nevertheless, in view of my definition of “intention”, a possible objection is that Carl’s intention of driving then and there was that he wanted to kill his uncle and, indeed, he did so by driving then and there, and so his intention or at least the purpose of his intention was achieved as a result of his intention. He could have chosen to stop because he was driving recklessly, but he chose not to do so. Therefore, Carl intended to kill his uncle, and he killed his uncle because of his intention. So, he executed his intention, albeit in a deviant way. Isn’t there a lot we achieve by luck and we say then that it is my achievement that I succeeded? Maybe there is no luck without an intention.
I leave it to you to analyse the other cases in my last blog (and to criticize my solution of Carl’s case), but can intentional action be a matter of degree, or a mixture of luck and intention? This is what I wondered when I read about Connie’s case: (Source; adapted)
Connie, who has never shot a bow and arrow, is offered a large cash prize for hitting the bull's-eye on a distant target that even experts normally miss. She carefully aims and shoots, hitting the target dead centre in just the (direct) way she hoped she would. Was Connie's hitting the target an intentional action? Note that Connie has no natural talent for shooting a bow and arrow: she tries equally hard to win even larger prizes for duplicating the feat, tries it many, many times again, but does not even come close. (Mele)
So, can I say to have an intention just because I try, though knowing that actually I have no chance to succeed? And if I succeed, was it intentional? Maybe, you say “yes” but what then is the difference between Connie’s case and a lottery? Okay, in case of a lottery, you don’t have any influence on the result, while when trying to hit the bull’s eye, at least you can aim in the right direction. Nevertheless, you don’t know how to handle a bow and how to hit the bull’s eye. Your intention was hitting the bull’s eye in order to win the prize, but technically you didn’t know how to hit. Your hitting the bull was not deliberative and therefore not intentional. Connie cannot say why she shot this way. Her shooting was like buying a lot in a lottery. She just did what she did.
But suppose now that Connie has become a member of an archery club. She is yet a beginner, but in the club she hits the bull's-eye 25% of the time (a). Then she has become more advanced and she hits the bull's-eye 50% of the time (b). Some time later she even hits the bull's-eye 80% of the time (c). And after some years she got the title of markswoman in her club, because she hits the bull's-eye at least 99% of the time. She knows – maybe intuitively – how to hit the mark (d). Before she gives it a try, she can say “I’ll win the prize” for in fact it is sure she will. For her it is no longer a lottery but it is like driving her car. You have to learn it, but once you know it, you simply do it. But how about case (a), the 25% case (or even less than 25%, if you like). Can we say then already that Connie hits the bull’s eye intentionally? Or in case (b), the 50% case? Etc. When can I say it was my intention to do so; I did it intentionally; I did it deliberatively? When don’t I need to say anymore that something happened to me but that I made it happen? Maybe we cannot achieve an intention without any luck.