Philosophia 49 (2):705-722 (2021)

Kristin M. Mickelson
University of Colorado, Boulder (PhD)
In “The Zygote Argument is Invalid: Now What?” (2015), Kristin Mickelson argues that Alfred Mele’s original Zygote Argument is invalid: its two premises tell us merely that the truth of determinism is correlated with the absence of free human agents, but the argument nonetheless concludes with a specific explanation for that correlation, namely that deterministic laws preclude—rule out, destroy, undermine, make impossible, rob us of—free will. In a recent essay, Gabriel De Marco (2016) grants that the original Zygote Argument is invalid for the reasons that Mickelson has identified, and claims that he has developed two new solutions to her invalidity objection. In this essay, Mickelson observes that both of DeMarco's proposed solutions are nonstarters. The first fails as a “rescue” because it simply restates a solution that Mickelson developed (2012/2015) and Mele had already adopted (in Mele 2013), albeit in slightly different jargon. De Marco's second rescue fails because it consists in a new fallacious variant of the original Zygote Argument which is open to criticism on the grounds that (i) it is deductively invalid, (ii) instantiates cum hoc ergo propter hoc reasoning, and (iii) introduces a new premises that begs the question against free-will impossibilists. Published Open Access.
Keywords manipulation argument  free will  determinism  incompossibilism  incompatibilism  best explanation  explanatory gap objection  manipulation argument  constitutive luck
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s11406-020-00243-0
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 69,160
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

An Essay on Free Will.Peter Van Inwagen - 1983 - Oxford University Press.
Living Without Free Will.Derk Pereboom - 2001 - Cambridge University Press.
Free Will and Luck.Alfred R. Mele - 2006 - Oxford University Press.

View all 44 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Zygote Argument is Invalid: Now What?Kristin Mickelson - 2015 - Philosophical Studies 172 (11):2911-2929.
Rescuing the Zygote Argument.Gabriel De Marco - 2016 - Philosophical Studies 173 (6):1621-1628.
Aborting the Zygote Argument.Stephen Kearns - 2012 - Philosophical Studies 160 (3):379-389.
Defending (a Modified Version of) the Zygote Argument.Patrick Todd - 2013 - Philosophical Studies 164 (1):189-203.
How Do Manipulation Arguments Work?John Fischer - 2016 - The Journal of Ethics 20 (1-3):47-67.
Subtractability and Concreteness.Ross P. Cameron - 2007 - Philosophical Quarterly 57 (227):273 - 279.
Contra-Argumento/Contraejemplo.John Corcoran - 2011 - In Luis Vega and Paula Olmos (ed.), Compendio de Lógica, Argumentación y Retórica. Editorial Trotta. pp. 137--141.
On Showing Invalidity.Thomas J. Mckay - 1984 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 14 (1):97 - 101.
Responsibility, Autonomy, and the Zygote Argument.John Fischer - 2017 - The Journal of Ethics 21 (3):223-237.


Added to PP index

Total views
106 ( #109,186 of 2,499,277 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
8 ( #89,633 of 2,499,277 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes