PhilArchive
open access
Fischer against the dilemma defence: the defence prevails
In a recent paper, John Fischer develops a new argument against the Principle of Alternative Possibilities (PAP) based on a deterministic scenario. Fischer uses this result (i) to rebut the Dilemma Defense - a well-known incompatibilist response to Frankfurt-type counterexamples to PAP; and (ii) to maintain that: If causal determinism rules out moral responsibility, it is not just in virtue of eliminating alternative possibilities. In this article, we argue that Fischer's new argument against PAP fails, thus leaving points (i) and (ii) unsupported
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Fischer’s Deterministic Frankfurt-Style Argument#711433
- A Coherent and Comprehensible Interpretation of Saul Smilansky’s Dualism#742720
- The Balancing View and the Transmission of Reasons#688031
- Do intuitions about Frankfurt-style cases rest on an internalist prejudice?#712499
- Minimising Resultant Moral Luck by Aligning Retrospective Ethical to Prospective Agential Causal Responsibility#697166
Record · ID 777083
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive