Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that The ability to 'do otherwise' should be analyzed in terms of what would have been believed had you chosen differently, not what was in fact believed.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Counterfactual beliefs are equally determined by prior conditions; shifting analysis doesn't solve determinism.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Responsibility requires control over actual deliberation, not hypothetical scenarios we never face.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
The claim confuses epistemic access (what we know about capacity) with metaphysical facts about free will.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Actual beliefs are causally determined by prior conditions, so moral responsibility cannot depend on them.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Counterfactual analysis better captures agents' capacity for rational self-governance than facts about causation.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
What we would believe under different choices reveals our actual reasoning abilities independent of luck.
?
How convincing is this?
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.