# DoingWithoutRepresentation **Abstract:** Hubert Dreyfus argues that the traditional and currently dominant conception of an action, as an event initiated or governed by a mental representation of a possible state of affairs that the agent is trying to realise, is inadequate. If Dreyfus is right, then we need a new conception of action. I argue, however, that the considerations that Dreyfus adduces show only that an action need not be initiated or governed by a conceptual representation, but since a representation need not be conceptually structured, do not show that we need a conception of action that does not involve representation. An action is not simply an event. An action is something someone does, not just something that happens. What makes an event an action, on the traditional and currently dominant view, is that it is initiated or governed by a mental state that represents a state of affairs that the agent is trying to realise in the world. To represent is to specify a possible object or state of affairs, so to say that the Bayeux Tapestry represents King Harold receiving an arrow in the eye at the Battle of Hastings is to say that it specifies the possible state of affairs of King Harold receiving an arrow in the eye at the Battle of Hastings, and this representation is satisfied if and only if King Harold received an arrow in the eye at the Battle of Hastings. To say that the mental state that initiates or governs the movements involved in an action is representational is to say that it specifies a possib **Authors:** [[Jonathan Webber]]