Incompatibilism and Ontological Priority in Kant's Theory of Free Will

In Pablo Muchnik (ed.), Incompatibilism and Ontological Priority in Kant's Theory of Free Will (2008)

Authors
Benjamin Vilhauer
City College of New York (CUNY)
Abstract
This paper concerns the role of the transcendental distinction between agents qua phenomena and qua noumena in Kant's theory of free will. It argues (1) that Kant's incompatibilism can be accommodated if one accepts the "ontological" interpretation of this distinction (i.e. the view that agents qua noumena are ontologically prior to agents qua phenomena), and (2) that Kant's incompatibilism cannot be accommodated by the "two-aspect" interpretation, whose defining feature is the rejection of the ontological priority of agents qua noumena. The ontological interpretation allows Kant to be an incompatibilist because the ontological priority of agents qua noumena "ontologically undermines" the significance of phenomenal determinism for agents' free will. That is, since agents qua noumena are ontologically prior to agents qua phenomena, the fact that agents qua noumena are not subject to determinism is more fundamental than the fact that agents qua phenomena are subject to determinism, and it is the more fundamental fact that we should be concerned with in the metaphysical foundations of moral responsibility. Recent (independent) work by myself, Eric Watkins, and Robert Hanna is drawn on to demonstrate that the ontological interpretation can mount a better defense against some traditional objections than has often been thought. According to the two-aspect interpretation, the transcendental distinction between agents qua noumena and qua phenomena is a semantic and epistemological distinction. Since it rejects the ontological priority of noumena, it has no way to assert that the non-determinism of agents qua noumena is more metaphysically fundamental than the determinism of agents qua phenomena. For the two-aspect interpretation, the truth of determinism must remain just as fundamental as the truth of any other characterization of agents. This means that, on the two-aspect interpretation, there is no better reason to call Kant an incompatibilist than there is to call him a compatibilist. Since Henry Allison has presented the most detailed two-aspect interpretation of the agential transcendental distinction, the arguments against the two-aspect distinction address his interpretation. Part of Allison's strategy is to argue that phenomenal determinism poses less of a problem for free will if we accept his accounts of the Second Analogy and empirical psychology. I point our problems in these accounts and argue that this strategy cannot be accepted.
Keywords kant  free will  incompatibilism  compatibilism  transcendental idealism  noumena  ontology  two-aspect  intelligible character
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive
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

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Living Without Free Will: The Case for Hard Incompatibilism.Derk Pereboom - 2002 - In Robert H. Kane (ed.), Journal of Ethics. Oxford University Press. pp. 477-488.
The Scope of Responsibility in Kant's Theory of Free Will.Benjamin Vilhauer - 2010 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 18 (1):45-71.
The Revisionist Turn: A Brief History of Recent Work on Free Will.Manuel Vargas - 2010 - In Jesus Aguilar, Andrei Buckareff & Keith Frankish (eds.), New Waves in Philosophy of Action. Palgrave.
Free Will and the Problem of Evil.James Cain - 2004 - Religious Studies 40 (4):437-456.
Is Incompatibilism Intuitive?Jason Turner, Eddy Nahmias, Stephen Morris & Thomas Nadelhoffer - 2006 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 73 (1):28-53.
On an Argument for Incompatibilism.David Widerker - 1987 - Analysis 47 (January):37-41.
Can We Interpret Kant as a Compatibilist About Determinism and Moral Responsibility?Ben Vilhauer - 2004 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 12 (4):719 – 730.
Ifs, Cans, and Free Will: The Issues.Bernard Berofsky - 2002 - In Robert H. Kane (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Free Will. Oxford University Press.
Problems with Actual-Sequence Incompatibilism.John Martin Fischer - 2000 - The Journal of Ethics 4 (4):323-328.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2013-06-15

Total views
53 ( #151,282 of 2,255,305 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
15 ( #58,330 of 2,255,305 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature