David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Dialectica 60 (4):453-459 (2006)
Many incompatibilists, including most prominently Peter Van Inwagen, have argued that deliberation presupposes a belief in libertarian freedom. They therefore suggest that deliberating determinists must have inconsistent beliefs: the belief they profess in determinism, as well as the belief, manifested in their deliberation, that determinism is false. In response, compatibilists have advanced alternative construals of the belief in freedom presupposed by deliberation, as well as cases designed to show that determinists can deliberate without inconsistency. I argue that the compatibilist case requires a convincing demonstration not merely that belief in determinism is consistent with deliberation, but also that such a belief does not place great psychological strain on agents, and that cases so far advanced have not succeeded in showing this. I then present a case designed to show that agents can accept determinism and deliberate, without inconsistent beliefs and without psychological strain
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Randolph Clarke (2003). Libertarian Accounts of Free Will. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Peter van Inwagen (1983). An Essay on Free Will. Oxford University Press.
Hilary Bok (1998). Freedom and Responsibility. Princeton University Press.
Dana K. Nelkin (2004). Freedom and Determinism. Cambridge MA: Bradford Book/MIT Press.
Citations of this work BETA
Derk Pereboom (2008). A Compatibilist Account of the Epistemic Conditions on Rational Deliberation. Journal of Ethics 12 (3/4):287 - 306.
Edmund Henden (2010). Deliberation Incompatibilism. Dialectica 64 (3):313-333.
Similar books and articles
Susanna Goodin (1996). Adams, Robert M. Leibniz: Determinist, Theist, Idealist. Review of Metaphysics 50 (1):143-144.
Michael S. Moore (1985). Review: The Determinist Theory of Excuses. [REVIEW] Ethics 95 (4):909 - 919.
Filip Grgić (1998). Aristotle Against the Determinist. International Philosophical Quarterly 38 (2):127-136.
L. Burkholder (1974). The Determinist Principle as Synthetic Anda Priori. Philosophia 4 (1):139-161.
Robert Simon (1973). Should Reasoning Embarrass the Determinist? Dialogue 12 (4):680-682.
Peter Millican (2011). Hume's Determinism. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 40 (4):611-642.
Chauncey Downes (1969). Can a Determinist Deliberate? Mind 78 (312):588-590.
Colwyn Williamson (1967). Ideology and the Problem of Knowledge. Inquiry 10 (1-4):121 – 138.
George Vasilev (2013). Preaching to the Choir or Converting the Uninitiated? The Integrative Potential of in-Group Deliberations. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 16 (1):109-129.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads35 ( #112,306 of 1,793,156 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #344,170 of 1,793,156 )
How can I increase my downloads?