The W-Defense Defended

Ergo: An Open Access Journal of Philosophy 11 (2024)
  Copy   BIBTEX


The W-defense is among the most prominent arguments for the principle of alternative possibilities (PAP). Here I offer some considerations in support of the W-defense and respond to what I see as the most forceful objections to it to date. My response to these objections invokes the well-known flicker of freedom response to Frankfurt cases. I argue that the W-defense and the flicker response are mutually reinforcing and together yield a compelling defense of PAP.

Similar books and articles

Flickering the W‐Defense.Michael Robinson - 2023 - Philosophical Issues 33 (1):198-210.
Robust flickers of freedom.Michael Robinson - 2019 - Social Philosophy and Policy 36 (1):211-233.
The Flicker of Freedom: A Reply to Stump.Justin A. Capes - 2014 - The Journal of Ethics 18 (4):427-435.
Three Recent Frankfurt Cases.Robert Lockie - 2014 - Philosophia 42 (4):1005-1032.
Capes on the W-Defense.David Palmer - 2013 - Philosophia 41 (2):555-566.


Added to PP

320 (#68,085)

6 months
170 (#23,739)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Justin A. Capes
Flagler College

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Alternate Possibilities and Moral Responsibility.Harry G. Frankfurt - 1969 - Journal of Philosophy 66 (23):829-839.
The Significance of Free Will.Robert Kane - 1996 - New York, US: Oxford University Press USA.
Ability and Responsibility.Peter van Inwagen - 1978 - Philosophical Review 87 (2):201 - 224.

View all 25 references / Add more references