David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophical Studies 107 (3):219-237 (2002)
Arguments for Restrictivism – the position that we are rarely free– have been proposed by incompatibilists Peter van Inwagen and David Vander Laan among others. This article is concerned much more with these arguments than with quantifying the frequency of free actions. There are two general ways to argue for restrictivism. First, one may take a Negative Strategy, arguing that the situations in which one is not free are common and predominant. Second, one may focus on situations in which one is apparently free, and argue directly that these situations are rare – the Inventory Strategy. I conclude that both types of arguments for restrictivism are unconvincing
|Keywords||Free Will Incompatibilism Metaphysics Restrictivism Van Inwagen, P Vander Laan, D|
|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
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Manuel Vargas (2005). The Trouble with Tracing. Midwest Studies in Philosophy 29 (1):269–291.
Eddy A. Nahmias (2006). Close Calls and the Confident Agent: Free Will, Deliberation, and Alternative Possibilities. Philosophical Studies 131 (3):627-667.
Peter A. Graham (2008). The Standard Argument for Blame Incompatibilism. Noûs 42 (4):697-726.
Similar books and articles
Manuel Vargas (2010). The Revisionist Turn: A Brief History of Recent Work on Free Will. In Jesus Aguilar, Andrei Buckareff & Keith Frankish (eds.), New Waves in Philosophy of Action. Palgrave
Peter van Inwagen (2004). Van Inwagen on Free Will. In Joseph K. Campbell (ed.), Freedom and Determinism. Cambridge MA: Bradford Book/MIT Press
Peter van Inwagen (1992). Reply to Christopher Hill's Van Inwagen on the Consequence Argument. Analysis 52 (2):56-61.
John Martin Fischer (1986). Van Inwagen on Free Will. Philosophical Quarterly 36 (April):252-260.
Laura W. Ekstrom (2003). Free Will, Chance, and Mystery. Philosophical Studies 22 (2):153-80.
Tim Button (2010). Dadaism: Restrictivism as Militant Quietism. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 110 (3pt3):387-398.
Seth Shabo (2011). Why Free Will Remains a Mystery. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 92 (1):105-125.
Meghan E. Griffith (2005). Does Free Will Remain a Mystery? A Response to Van Inwagen. Philosophical Studies 124 (3):261-269.
D. Vander-Laan (2001). A Regress Argument for Restrictive Incompatibilism. Philosophical Studies 103 (2):201-215.
Neil Levy (forthcoming). Restrictivism is a Covert Compatibilism. In N. Trakakis (ed.), Essays on Free Will and Moral Responsibility. Cambridge Scholars Press
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads33 ( #115,739 of 1,789,985 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #318,432 of 1,789,985 )
How can I increase my downloads?