Counter-arguments for the Frankfurt cases


What is the Frankfurt type counterexample?

Frankfurt cases (also known as Frankfurt counterexamples or Frankfurt-style cases) were presented by philosopher Harry Frankfurt in 1969 as counterexamples to the principle of alternate possibilities (PAP), which holds that an agent is morally responsible for an action only if that person could have done otherwise.

What does Frankfurt argue?

Frankfurt’s Principle of Alternative Possibilities and Moral Responsibility states that, “A person is morally responsible for what he has done only if he could have done otherwise” (Frank- furt 159).

What do Frankfurt cases express about the nature of free will and moral responsibility?

A link between moral responsibility and free will. Why, although Frankfurt describes his argument as one which shows that one can be morally responsible even if one could not have done otherwise, it can be also plausibly taken to show that one can act freely even if one could not have done otherwise.

See also  How can one argue against income inequality while defending achievement and expertise inequality - beyond invoking Rawls' difference principle?

What does Frankfurt say about moral responsibility?

Frankfurt 1969): Principle of Alternative Possibilities (PAP): a person is morally responsible for what she has done only if she could have done otherwise. Although its precise form and interpretation have varied, this principle has enjoyed broad support in the history of philosophy.

What is a Frankfurt style case?

ABSTRACT. Frankfurt-Style Cases (FSCs) seem to elicit the intuitive judgment that an agent is morally responsible despite being unable to act otherwise, which is supposed to falsify the Principle of Alternative Possibility (PAP).

What revision does Frankfurt suggest for the principle of alternate possibilities?

As PAP is very much embedded in our moral discourse, Frankfurt offers a revised version that aims to correct PAP’s flaws. He suggests “a person is not morally responsible for what he has done if he did it only because he could not have done otherwise.”4 His argument for this revision is twofold.

Who is Frankfurt philosophy?

Harry Gordon Frankfurt (born May 29, 1929) is an American philosopher. He is professor emeritus of philosophy at Princeton University, where he taught from . Frankfurt has also taught at Yale University, Rockefeller University, and Ohio State University.

What is the libertarian argument for free will?

Libertarians believe that free will is incompatible with causal determinism, and agents have free will. They therefore deny that causal determinism is true. There are three major categories of libertarians. Event-causal libertarians believe that free actions are indeterministically caused by prior events.

What does Frankfurt claim about freedom?

What is Frankfurt’s account of freewill? It is in virtue of the fact that a person can have volitions of the second order that she is capable of having free will. Freedom of the will is not simply a matter of just being able to do what one wants to do.

See also  Is there a theory of knowledge that is based on suspicions rather than beliefs?

Why is JoJo not morally responsible for his actions according to Wolf?

This proposal explains why JoJo is not responsible for his actions. Simply put, JoJo is insane. To be “sane” in Wolf’s sense is to know what one is doing AND to have beliefs that correctly correspond to the way the world is. JoJo’s beliefs do not match up correctly with the world in this way.

Does Susan Wolf believe in free will?

According to Susan Wolf, free will involves conducting oneself in a manner that is consistent with reason guided by what is good and what is true. This means that people are free when they do the correct things and slaves to their own flesh when they act in the wrong manner.

Is JoJo insane?

As a counterexample to the RSV, Wolf offers the case of JoJo, the son of a dictator, who endorses his father’s (evil) values, but who is insane and is thus not responsible for his actions.

What problem does JoJo raise for the deep self view according to Wolf?

The insane son of an evil dictator who isn’t responsible for his actions. Wolf raises problems for the deep-self view, arguing that it isn’t sufficient for responsibility. That one is able to recognize and appreciate the world for what it is.

What does moral sanity mean?

This paper is about the conditions of what I call “moral sanity,” meaning. the minimum capability to respond to practical reason that an agent must. satisfy to be held morally blameworthy or praiseworthy for some element. of their agency (e.g., an action, omission, or decision).

See also  How to reconcile the fact that mathematical proofs are logical implications with the lack of a formal calculus equivalent to the logical implication?

What does Wolf mean by the deep self view?

Wolf proposes the sane deep-self view states that for an individual to be morally responsible for some action they have committed, if and only if (1) this individual is able to control that action by their desires, as well as such desires are governed by their deep selves, and (2) the individual’s deep self is sane.