Frankfurt counterexample defended

Analysis 71 (1):102 - 104 (2011)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Frankfurt sets out to refute the principle according to which ‘a person is morally responsible for what he has done only if he could have done otherwise’ . Frankfurt devises a counterexample in which an agent is intuitively responsible even though she could not have done otherwise: Suppose someone – Black, let us say – wants Jones to perform a certain action. Black is prepared to go to considerable lengths to get his way, but he prefers to avoid showing his hand unnecessarily. So he waits until Jones is about to make up his mind what to do, and he does nothing unless it is clear to him that Jones is going to decide to do something other than what he wants him to do. If it does become clear that Jones is going to decide to do something else, Black takes effective steps to ensure that Jones decides to do, and that he does do, what he wants him to do. Whatever Jones's initial preferences and inclinations, then, Black will have his way … Now suppose that Black never has to show his hand because Jones, for reasons of his own, decides to perform and does perform the very action Black wants him to perform. In that case, it seems clear, Jones will bear precisely …

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-06-19

Downloads
266 (#76,247)

6 months
11 (#237,740)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Ezio Di Nucci
University of Copenhagen

Citations of this work

Priming Effects and Free Will.Ezio Di Nucci - 2012 - International Journal of Philosophical Studies 20 (5):725-734.
Addiction, Compulsion, and Agency.Ezio Di Nucci - 2014 - Neuroethics 7 (1):105-107.
Alternate Possibilities and Moral Asymmetry.Daniel Avi Coren - 2018 - Acta Analytica 33 (2):145-159.

View all 7 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Frankfurt counter-example defused.Brendan Larvor - 2010 - Analysis 70 (3):506-508.

Add more references