• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>The Journal of Ethics >Moral Responsibility, Manipulation Arguments, and History: Assessing the Resilience of Nonhistorical Compatibilism
【24h】

Moral Responsibility, Manipulation Arguments, and History: Assessing the Resilience of Nonhistorical Compatibilism

机译：道德责任，操纵论点和历史：评估非历史性相容性的弹性

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Manipulation arguments for incompatibilism all build upon some example or other in which an agent is covertly manipulated into acquiring a psychic structure on the basis of which she performs an action. The featured agent, it is alleged, is manipulated into satisfying conditions compatibilists would take to be sufficient for acting freely. Such an example used in the context of an argument for incompatibilism is meant to elicit the intuition that, due to the pervasiveness of the manipulation, the agent does not act freely and is not morally responsible for what she does. It is then claimed that any agent’s coming to be in the same psychic state through a deterministic process is no different in any relevant respect from the pertinent manner of manipulation. Hence, it is concluded that compatibilists’ proposed sufficient conditions for free will and moral responsibility are inadequate, and that free will and moral responsibility are incompatible with determinism. One way for compatibilists to resist certain manipulation arguments is by appealing to historical requirements that, they contend, relevant manipulated agents lack. While a growing number of compatibilists advance an historical thesis, in this paper, I redouble my efforts to show, in defense of nonhistorical compatibilists like Harry Frankfurt, that there is still life left in a nonhistorical view. The historical compatibilists, I contend, have fallen shy of discrediting their nonhistorical compatibilist rivals.
机译：对不兼容的操纵论点都建立在一个例子或其他例子上，在该例子中，暗中操纵一个代理以获取一种心理结构，并以此为基础进行行动。据称，有特色的经纪人被操纵为满足条件，相容者将足以采取行动。在不相容论证的上下文中使用的这种示例旨在引起直觉，即由于操纵的普遍性，代理人无法自由行动，并且对其行为不承担任何道德责任。然后声称，任何行动者通过确定性过程进入相同的心理状态，在任何相关方面都与相关的操纵方式没有什么不同。因此，可以得出结论，相容主义者为自由意志和道德责任提出的充分条件是不充分的，并且自由意志和道德责任与确定性不相容。相容主义者抵制某些操纵论点的一种方法是，诉诸他们认为相关的操纵者缺乏的历史要求。尽管越来越多的兼容主义者提出了历史命题，但在本文中，我加倍努力表明，为捍卫像哈里·法兰克福这样的非历史兼容论者，仍然存在非历史观点。我认为，历史兼容主义者已经羞辱了他们的非历史兼容主义者的竞争对手。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号