Libertarianism, the Rollback Argument, and the Objective Probability of Free Choices

Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 98 (4):512-532 (2016)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

It is widely assumed that candidates for free, undetermined choices must have objective probabilities prior to their performance. Indeed although this premise figures prominently in a widely discussed argument against libertarianism, few libertarians have called it into question. In this article, I will investigate whether libertarians ought to reject it. I will conclude that doing so should not be tempting to event-causal libertarians or most agent-causal ones, because the added costs outweigh the benefits.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,779

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2016-01-09

Downloads
60 (#260,951)

6 months
14 (#254,662)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Peter Furlong
Valencia College

References found in this work

Actions, Reasons, and Causes.Donald Davidson - 1963 - Journal of Philosophy 60 (23):685.
Précis of Responsibility and the Moral Sentiments.R. Jay Wallace - 2002 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 64 (3):680-681.
What conditional probability could not be.Alan Hájek - 2003 - Synthese 137 (3):273--323.
Free will and luck: Reply to critics.Alfred R. Mele - 2007 - Philosophical Explorations 10 (2):153 – 155.
Free Acts and Chance: Why The Rollback Argument Fails.Lara Buchak - 2013 - Philosophical Quarterly 63 (250):20-28.

View all 28 references / Add more references