Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Frankfurt-style cases demonstrate that an agent can possess a power to act while a counterfactual intervener guarantees the alternative cannot be realized.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.If an intervener guarantees an alternative cannot occur, the agent lacks a genuine power to realize that alternative, making the power illusory.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The distinction between actual and counterfactual scenarios collapses under scrutiny—powers must extend to what agents could actually do, not just what they do when unblocked.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Frankfurt cases conflate acting on one's desires with possessing the power to do otherwise, which are logically separable conditions for free will.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.An agent's power to act depends on their intrinsic capacities, not on what external interveners might do in unrealized scenarios.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Frankfurt cases show agents acting on their actual motivations absent intervention, demonstrating genuine alternative possibilities in action.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Moral responsibility requires only that an agent could have acted differently given their actual mental states, not metaphysical freedom from all causal determination.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.