This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
This page appears to deal mainly with US law on criminal intention. Could someone please confirm whether this is so and make it clear on the page? Perhaps there ought to be an "Intention in US Law" article (to mirror "Intention in English Law"), leaving this one free to deal with criminal intention in general terms. 18.104.22.168.
"A person intends a consequence they foresee that it will happen if the given series of acts or omissions continue, and desires it to happen."
This sentence does not make sense to me. I feel that "they foresee that it will happen" may be somehow out of skew by not starting the sentence with the word "When," as in, "When a person intends a consequence..." later followed by "...consequences, they foresee that it will happen." --Cyberman (talk) 09:59, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
There needs to be some clarification in the sentence structure. --Cyberman (talk) 09:59, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
Whoever has written oblique intention seems to have instead covered the issue of 'intervening acts' which comes under causation.
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the proposal was support for move. I think Anthony Appleyard's suggested modification is a good one, sewing up any ambiguity.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:06, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.