Derk Pereboom's four-case manipulation argument demonstrates that if a neuroscientist directly programs an agent's reasons-responsive mechanism, compatibilist conditions can be fully satisfied yet the agent is clearly unfree.
?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.
Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.
Reasons-responsive mechanism(as what the neuroscientist is programming)
The part of your brain that allows you to understand reasons, think about them, and act based on what you believe is a good reason—basically, your ability to think and respond to logic.
Unfree(as the conclusion about the manipulated agent)
Not having the genuine ability to make your own choices; being forced or controlled by something outside yourself.
agent(Economics terminology applied to medical ethics)
The party in a principal-agent relationship who is instructed to produce the good or service on the principal's behalf — in the medical context, the doctor
compatibilist conditions(Used to argue that Bert satisfies all such conditions yet still acts unfreely, undermining compatibilism.)
The set of conditions proposed by compatibilists as sufficient for free and morally responsible agency, which may include both historical conditions (about how an agent's character was formed) and nonhistorical conditions (about the agent's current psychological states and capacities).