The Luck Objection

Abstract

Libertarians propose that if agents are to act freely they must have alternative possibilities open to them and control over which possibility becomes actual. To secure alternative possibilities, libertarians must accept that our free actions are undetermined events. Proponents of the “luck objection” to libertarianism argue that undetermined events are not the sorts of things over which agents can have control. In what follows, I defend the luck objection against three of the more promising libertarian rejoinders.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 103,945

External links

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

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Similar books and articles

On the Luck Objection to Libertarianism.David Widerker - 2015 - In Andrei Buckareff, Carlos Moya & Sergi Rosell, Agency, Freedom, and Moral Responsibility. New York: Palgrave-Macmillan. pp. 94-115.
The Two‐Stage Luck Objection.Seth Shabo - 2020 - Noûs 54 (1):3-23.
Grounding the Luck Objection.Neal A. Tognazzini - 2015 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 93 (1):127-138.
Libertarianism and the luck objection.Ishtiyaque Haji - 2000 - The Journal of Ethics 4 (4):329-337.
Grounding and the luck objection to agent-causal libertarianism.Joel Archer - 2022 - Philosophical Studies 179 (5):1763-1775.

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-09-01

Downloads
60 (#383,465)

6 months
27 (#124,680)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references