Frankfurt-Examples and Moral Responsibility

When Reppert gives links for arguments I give links for counter-arguments.

Robert Allen discusses criticisms of Frankfurt counter-examples: "Below, I respond to four recent attempts to show that "Frankfurt cases," as examples structurally identical to Frankfurt’s have come to be known, fail of their purpose. In the first, I expose a misconception of what it is to be disadvantaged. My challenge to the second stems from its reliance upon the notion of "moral luck." The third, while conceding that Frankfurt cases do falsify PAP in regards to "complex" actions like casting a ballot, argues that they can not be used to do the same vis-a`-vis "simple" mental acts such as taking a decision. By appealing to the connection between assessments of character and judgments of moral responsibility, I intend to show that this dichotomy does not hold. I close with a discussion of a libertarian alternative to PAP."

Libertarian Robert Kane agrees that Frankfurt cases show that one can be morally responsible for a particular action even though he couldn't have done otherwise just as long as he was libertarian free in forming is character in the past. Robert Allen responds: "The consensus among free will theorists is that an agent can will freely to * without presently being able to form another volition. Frankfurt cases have helped to secure this agreement. It is still an open question, however, whether someone could be willing freely to * if there was nothing that she could have done to keep from forming that volition, her character having been determined."

John Martin Fischer on Frankfurt-Examples and Moral Responsibility: Fischer's a leading expert in this field.