We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
In defense of hard-line replies to the multiple-case manipulation argument.
- Authors
Haas, Daniel
- Abstract
I defend a hard-line reply to Derk Pereboom's four-case manipulation argument. Pereboom accuses compatibilists who take a hard-line reply to his manipulation argument of adopting inappropriate initial attitudes towards the cases central to his argument. If Pereboom is correct he has shown that a hard-line response is inadequate. Fortunately for the compatibilist, Pereboom's list of appropriate initial attitudes is incomplete and at least one of the initial attitudes he leaves out provides room for a revised hard-line reply to be successfully mounted against the multiple-case argument.
- Subjects
FREE will &; determinism; RESPONSIBILITY; PEREBOOM, Derk; ATTITUDE (Psychology); ARGUMENT
- Publication
Philosophical Studies, 2013, Vol 163, Issue 3, p797
- ISSN
0031-8116
- Publication type
Article
- DOI
10.1007/s11098-011-9847-6