Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Free Will, Agency, and Meaning in Life$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Derk Pereboom

Print publication date: 2014

Print ISBN-13: 9780199685516

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: April 2014

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199685516.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2018. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy).date: 17 June 2018

A Manipulation Argument against Compatibilism

A Manipulation Argument against Compatibilism

Chapter:
(p.71) 4 A Manipulation Argument against Compatibilism
Source:
Free Will, Agency, and Meaning in Life
Author(s):

Derk Pereboom

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199685516.003.0005

The idea that motivates a manipulation argument against compatibilism is that an action’s production by a deterministic process, even when the agent satisfies the conditions on moral responsibility specified by compatibilists, presents no less of a challenge to basic-desert responsibility than does deterministic manipulation by other agents. The chapter’s multiple-case manipulation argument sets out several such examples, the first of which features the most radical manipulation consistent with the compatibilist conditions. The subsequent cases are progressively more like a final example, which the compatibilist might envision to be realistic, in which the action is causally determined in a natural way. A challenge for the compatibilist is to point out a principled difference between any two adjacent cases that would show why the agent might be responsible in the later but not in the earlier one. This chapter presents an updated version of the argument and responses to objections raised against it.

Keywords:   compatibilism, manipulation argument, basic desert, higher-order desire, reasons-responsiveness, bypassing, hard-line reply, soft-line reply

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .