Philosophical Explorations 9 (2):179 – 201 (2006)
|Abstract||Famed so-called 'Frankfurt-type examples' have been invoked to cast doubt on the principle that a person is morally responsible for what she has done only if she could have done otherwise. Many who disagree that the examples are successful in this respect argue that these examples succumb to a deadly dilemma. I uncover and assess libertarian assumptions upon which the 'dilemma objection' is based. On exposing these assumptions, it becomes clear that various sorts of libertarian are no longer entitled to one or the other horns of the dilemma.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Wolfgang Liebert & Jan C. Schmidt (2010). Collingridge's Dilemma and Technoscience. Poiesis and Praxis 7 (1-2):55-71.
Carl Ginet & David Palmer (2010). On Mele and Robb's Indeterministic Frankfurt-Style Case. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 80 (2):440-446.
Daniel James Speak (2007). The Impertinence of Frankfurt-Style Argument. Philosophical Quarterly 57 (226):76-95.
David Palmer (2010). On Mele and Robb's Indeterministic Frankfurt-Style Case. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 80 (2):440-446.
Peter Van Inwagen (1999). Moral Responsibility, Determinism, and the Ability to Do Otherwise. Journal of Ethics 3 (4):341 - 350.
Peter van Inwagen (1999). Moral Responsibility, Determinism, and the Ability to Do Otherwise. Journal of Ethics 3 (4):343-351.
Maria Alvarez (2009). Actions, Thought-Experiments and the 'Principle of Alternate Possibilities'. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 87 (1):61 – 81.
David Palmer (forthcoming). Pereboom on the Frankfurt Cases. Philosophical Studies.
Richard M. Glatz (2008). The (Near) Necessity of Alternate Possibilities for Moral Responsibility. Philosophical Studies 139 (2):257 - 272.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads20 ( #62,418 of 556,909 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,931 of 556,909 )
How can I increase my downloads?