Dialectica 62 (4):495-507 (2008)
|Abstract||Cases involving clandestine manipulation pose a significant challenge to compatibilist conceptions of free will. But compatibilists often argue that they are not alone and that modest libertarian conceptions of free will are also susceptible to the problem. I take issue with this claim. I argue that agent-causal libertarian views are not susceptible to the problem. I then argue that the compatibilist cannot cite a relevant difference between agent-causal libertarian views and modest libertarian views. Therefore from a compatibilist's perspective modest libertarian views are impervious to the problem of clandestine manipulation.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Christopher Evan Franklin (2011). The Problem of Enhanced Control. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 89 (4):687 - 706.
Ned Markosian (2012). Agent Causation as the Solution to All the Compatibilist's Problems. Philosophical Studies 157 (3):383 - 398.
Timothy O'Connor (2002). Libertarian Views: Dualist and Agent-Causal Theories. In Robert H. Kane (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Free Will. Oxford University Press.
Randolph Clarke (1999). Free Choice, Effort, and Wanting More. Philosophical Explorations 2 (1):20-41.
Ishtiyaque Haji (2005). Libertarianism, Luck, and Action Explanation. Journal of Philosophical Research 30:321-340.
Alfred R. Mele (2003). Chisholm on Freedom. Metaphilosophy 34 (5):630-648.
Gerald K. Harrison (2010). A Challenge for Soft Line Replies to Manipulation Cases. Philosophia 38 (3):555-568.
Roger Clarke (2012). How to Manipulate an Incompatibilistically Free Agent. American Philosophical Quarterly 49 (2):139-49.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads28 ( #49,781 of 722,701 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #36,438 of 722,701 )
How can I increase my downloads?