David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophical Studies 156 (2):249-266 (2010)
Local miracle compatibilists claim that we are sometimes able to do otherwise than we actually do, even if causal determinism obtains. When we can do otherwise, it will often be true that if we were to do otherwise, then an actual law of nature would not have been a law of nature. Nevertheless, it is a compatibilist principle that we cannot do anything that would be or cause an event that violates the laws of nature. Carl Ginet challenges this nomological principle, arguing that it is not always capable of explaining our inability to do otherwise. In response to this challenge, I point out that this principle is part of a defense against the charge that local miracle compatibilists are committed to outlandish claims. Thus it is not surprising that the principle, by itself, will often fail to explain our inability to do otherwise. I then suggest that in many situations in which we are unable to do otherwise, this can be explained by the compatibilist’s analysis of ability, or his criteria for the truth of ability claims. Thus, the failure of his nomological principle to explain the falsity of certain ability claims is no strike against local miracle compatibilism
|Keywords||Free will Determinism Compatibilism Local miracle compatibilism Ability|
|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
David Lewis (1986). Philosophical Papers Vol. II. Oxford University Press.
Carl Ginet (1990). On Action. Cambridge University Press.
David Lewis (1979). Counterfactual Dependence and Time's Arrow. Noûs 13 (4):455-476.
Peter van Inwagen (1983). An Essay on Free Will. Oxford University Press.
David Lewis (1981). Are We Free to Break the Laws? Theoria 47 (3):113-21.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Saul Smilansky (1991). The Contrariety of Compatibilist Positions. Journal of Philosophical Research 16:293-309.
Chris Slupik (1995). A New Interpretation of Hume's 'Of Miracles'. Religious Studies 31 (4):517 - 536.
John Perry (2004). Compatibilist Options. In David Shier, Michael O'Rourke & Joseph Keim Campbell (eds.), Freedom and Determinism. MIT Press/Bradford Book 231.
Ann Whittle (2010). Dispositional Abilities. Philosophers' Imprint 10 (12).
Steven M. Bayne (2007). Hume on Miracles: Would It Take a Miracle to Believe in a Miracle? Southern Journal of Philosophy 45 (1):1-29.
Timothy Pritchard (2011). Miracles and Violations. Religious Studies 47 (1):41-58.
Tomis Kapitan (1991). Ability and Cognition: A Defense of Compatibilism. Philosophical Studies 63 (August):231-43.
Helen Beebee (2003). Local Miracle Compatibilism. Noûs 37 (2):258-277.
Peter A. Graham (2008). A Defense of Local Miracle Compatibilism. Philosophical Studies 140 (1):65 - 82.
S. Oakley (2006). Defending Lewis's Local Miracle Compatibilism. Philosophical Studies 130 (2):337-349.
Added to index2010-07-19
Total downloads49 ( #82,125 of 1,789,808 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #262,654 of 1,789,808 )
How can I increase my downloads?