The W-defense

Philosophical Studies 150 (1):61-77 (2010)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

There has been a great deal of critical discussion of Harry Frankfurt’s argument against the Principle of Alternative Possibilities (PAP), almost all of which has focused on whether the Frankfurt-style examples, which are designed to be counterexamples to PAP, can be given a coherent formulation. Recently, however, David Widerker has argued that even if Frankfurt-style examples can be given a coherent formulation, there is reason to believe that an agent in those examples could never be morally blameworthy for what she has done. Therefore, such examples do not undermine a version of PAP restricted to blameworthiness. Widerker refers to his argument for this claim as the W-defense. I examine the W-defense in some detail, along with three recent replies to it by defenders of Frankfurt’s argument. I contend that each of these replies is problematic and, indeed, that two of them play directly into the hands of those seeking to defend PAP. I then develop my own reply to the W-defense by calling into question an assumption which is at the heart of that argument regarding the nature of moral blame.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

    This entry is not archived by us. If you are the author and have permission from the publisher, we recommend that you archive it. Many publishers automatically grant permission to authors to archive pre-prints. By uploading a copy of your work, you will enable us to better index it, making it easier to find.

    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 103,792

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Capes on the W-Defense.David Palmer - 2013 - Philosophia 41 (2):555-566.
Flickering the W‐Defense.Michael Robinson - 2023 - Philosophical Issues 33 (1):198-210.
The W-Defense Defended.Justin A. Capes - 2024 - Ergo: An Open Access Journal of Philosophy 11.
Frankfurt-Counterexamples and the “W-Defense”.G. Carlos Patarroyo - 2013 - Eidos: Revista de Filosofía de la Universidad Del Norte 19:56-80.
Frankfurt-Counterexamples and the “W-Defense”[Spanish].G. Patarroyo & G. Carlos - 2013 - Eidos: Revista de Filosofía de la Universidad Del Norte 19:56-80.
Stumping For Widerker.Stewart Goetz - 1999 - Faith and Philosophy 16 (1):83-89.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-03-30

Downloads
202 (#128,338)

6 months
11 (#310,867)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Justin A. Capes
Flagler College

Citations of this work

The W-Defense Defended.Justin A. Capes - 2024 - Ergo: An Open Access Journal of Philosophy 11.
Capes on the W-Defense.David Palmer - 2013 - Philosophia 41 (2):555-566.
Blame and the Humean Theory of Motivation.Adam R. Thompson - 2017 - Philosophia 45 (3):1345-1364.

View all 6 citations / Add more citations