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
    Jones retains a morally relevant ability to do otherwise,... — Carmelics
    Home/Moral Responsibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Jones retains a morally relevant ability to do otherwise, preserving the principle of alternative possibilities

    Free Will & ForeknowledgeMoral Responsibility
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.The charge that Jones's retained alternatives are insufficiently robust is incorrect
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The ability Jones retains is morally relevant even if not robust in the sense Frankfurt's defenders require
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Frankfurt's cases are specifically designed so that the alternative available to Jones involves no agency: Black intervenes before any deliberation occurs.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.An alternative that bypasses deliberative agency cannot ground moral responsibility, since responsibility requires that the agent's own reasoning make a difference.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore, the retained 'ability' is not morally relevant because it is disconnected from the agent's reasons-responsive mechanism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Fischer and Ravizza argue that moral responsibility requires reasons-responsiveness, not mere alternative possibilities, rendering PAP dispensable.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the mechanism actually producing Jones's action is reasons-responsive in the actual sequence, the counterfactual intervener is irrelevant to attributing responsibility.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Defending PAP by appeal to Jones's retained alternatives thus concedes too much to the incompatibilist framing while missing the actual basis of moral responsibility.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

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

    Topics

    Moral ResponsibilityFree Will & Foreknowledge

    Related

    An alternative that bypasses deliberative agency cannot ground moral responsibil...Defending PAP by appeal to Jones's retained alternatives thus concedes too much ...Fischer and Ravizza argue that moral responsibility requires reasons-responsiven...Frankfurt's cases are specifically designed so that the alternative available to...
    +4 moreShow less
    If the mechanism actually producing Jones's action is reasons-responsive in the ...The ability Jones retains is morally relevant even if not robust in the sense Fr...The charge that Jones's retained alternatives are insufficiently robust is incor...Therefore, the retained 'ability' is not morally relevant because it is disconne...

    Similar

    The principle of alternative possibilities (PAP) is false.79%The alternative interpretation — that human beings were given capacity...79%A person may be morally responsible for an action despite lacking any ...78%It is morally permissible to bring about and maintain a belief for whi...77%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: incompatibilism-arguments
    View source passageHide passage
    Frankfurt’s argument has been enormously influential, though perhaps not in the way he intended. His thought experiment was a failure; while most compatibilists were convinced, most incompatibilists were not. (Compatibilists who were not convinced include Smith 1997, 2004; Campbell 2005; Fara 2008; Vihvelin 2000 and 2013.) These incompatibilists insisted, though not for the reason given above, that Black does not succeed in robbing Jones of all his freedom; there is something that remains up to
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit