Bailey on Incompatibilism and the “No Past Objection”

Logos and Episteme 2 (4):613-617 (2011)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In ”Incompatibilism and the Past,” Andrew Bailey engages in a thorough investigation of what he calls the "No Past Objection" to arguments for incompatibilism.This is an objection that stems from the work of Joseph Keim Campbell and that has generated an Interesting literature. Bailey ends by offering his own answer to the No Past Objection by giving his own argument for incompatibilism, an argument that he claims to be immune to the objection. We have some observations to make regarding what we take to be Bailey's answer to the objection (all of whose details are left to the reader – we attempt to fill this lacuna).

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,098

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Incompatibilism and the Past.Andrew M. Bailey - 2012 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 85 (2):351-376.
Presentism and the objection from being-supervenience.Brian Kierland & Bradley Monton - 2007 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 85 (3):485-497.
Self-Stultification Objection.F. De Brigard - 2014 - Journal of Consciousness Studies 21 (5-6):120-130.
No closure on skepticism.Anthony Brueckner Yuval Avnur - 2011 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 92 (4):439-447.
No Closure On Skepticism.Yuval Avnur, Anthony Brueckner & Christopher Buford - 2011 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 92 (4):439-447.
The Zygote Argument is invalid: Now what?Kristin Mickelson - 2015 - Philosophical Studies 172 (11):2911-2929.

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-01-11

Downloads
47 (#348,443)

6 months
8 (#415,230)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Christopher Buford
University of Akron

Citations of this work

Add more citations

References found in this work

Add more references