Skip to main content
Log in

Alternative Possibilities, Luck, and Moral Responsibility

  • Published:
The Journal of Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

I first question whether genuinealternatives are necessary for moralresponsibility by assessing the assumption thataccessibility to such alternatives is vital tohaving the kind of control required forresponsibility. I next suggest that theavailability of genuine alternatives courtsproblems of responsibility-subverting luck foran important class of libertarian theories. Isummarize one such problem and respond torecent replies it has elicited. I then proposethat if this ``luck objection'' against theidentified class of libertarian theories ispersuasive, a similar objection appears toafflict compatibilist theories as well.Finally, I show that reflections on luck maywell take some bite out of variousFrankfurt-type examples. These are examplesdesigned to establish that an agent can bemorally responsible for an action despiteacting with libertarian free will in theabsence of genuine or pertinent alternatives.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Haji, I. Alternative Possibilities, Luck, and Moral Responsibility. The Journal of Ethics 7, 253–275 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024693312558

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024693312558

Navigation