The Problem of Enhanced Control

Australasian Journal of Philosophy 89 (4):687 - 706 (2011)
A crucial question for libertarians about free will and moral responsibility concerns how their accounts secure more control than compatibilism. This problem is particularly exasperating for event-causal libertarianism, as it seems that the only difference between these accounts and compatibilism is that the former require indeterminism. But how can indeterminism, a mere negative condition, enhance control? This worry has led many to conclude that the only viable form of libertarianism is agent-causal libertarianism. In this paper I show that this conclusion is premature. I explain how event-causal libertarianism secures more control than compatibilism by offering a novel argument for incompatibilism. Part of the reason my solution has gone unnoticed is that it is often mistakenly assumed that an agent's control is wholly exhausted by the agent's powers and abilities. I argue, however, that control is constituted not just by what we have the ability to do, but also by what we have the opportunity to do. And it is by furnishing agents with new opportunities that event-causal libertarianism secures enhanced control. In order to defend this claim, I provide an analysis of opportunities and construct a novel incompatibilist argument to show that the opportunity to do otherwise is incompatible with determinism
Keywords free will  moral responsibility  ability  opportunity  incompatibilism
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1080/00048402.2010.524234
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
Download options
PhilPapers Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 24,433
External links
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

View all 36 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Philip Swenson (2016). Ability, Foreknowledge, and Explanatory Dependence. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 94 (4):658-671.

View all 14 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles
M. Almeida & M. Bernstein (2003). Lucky Libertarianism. Philosophical Studies 22 (2):93-119.
Bernard Berofsky (2006). The Myth of Source. Acta Analytica 21 (4):3 - 18.
Alfred R. Mele (2005). Libertarianism, Luck, and Control. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 86 (3):381-407.
Tomis Kapitan (2002). A Master Argument for Incompatibilism? In Robert H. Kane (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Free Will. Oxford University Press. pp. 127--157.
John Martin Fischer (1999). The Value of Moral Responsibility. The Proceedings of the Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy 1:129-140.
Paul Russell (2002). Responsibility and Control. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 32:587-606.

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

86 ( #56,015 of 1,925,076 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

9 ( #96,574 of 1,925,076 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

Start a new thread
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.