Rethinking the Double Law of Habit: James’ Case

In this paper I suggest to rethink the traditional double law of habit as a theoretical development of the co-presence of activity and passivity inherent to the concept of habit. My thesis is twofold: firstly, I will argue that speaking in terms of the double nature of habit is conceptually different from speaking in terms of the double law of habit because recognition of the former does not necessarily entail endorsement of the latter. Secondly, I will argue that the traditional formulation of the double law brings the risk of the dualism between activity and passivity of action, and the dualism between habit and will. In particular, I will look at James’ Principles of Psychology as a relevant example: I will argue that James conceptualizes the double nature of habit through the notion of plasticity without formulating the double law of habit as developed by his predecessors.