Should Kane Abandon the Symmetry of Efforts of Will? | ||
| پژوهشهای فلسفی -کلامی | ||
| دوره 26، شماره 3، مهر 1403، صفحه 5-24 اصل مقاله (1.41 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله علمی پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22091/jptr.2024.10366.3014 | ||
| نویسنده | ||
| Neil Campbell* | ||
| Professor, Department of Philosophy, Wilfrid Laurier University, Canada. | ||
| چکیده | ||
| An agent’s efforts of will have long been at the center of Robert Kane’s influential account of libertarian free will. For several decades it has been a crucial part of his theory that there is a symmetry to these efforts. That is, Kane has long maintained that an agent engaged in an undetermined choice makes a simultaneous and sustained effort to choose and to choose otherwise. In a recent paper, Kane abandons this symmetry. I outline and evaluate this change in Kane’s theory. I begin by explaining how Kane’s theory has changed from a symmetric to an asymmetric account of undetermined free choices. I then explore the philosophical benefits of adopting an asymmetric account by considering its implications for the explanatory luck objection, the phenomenological objection, and the objection that engaging in dual efforts of will involves an unacceptable form of irrationality. Finally, I argue that despite these benefits, Kane’s asymmetric model opens the door to a more pervasive worry about luck and it gives up something most libertarians want: the unconditional ability to choose otherwise. Given these points, I conclude the cost of abandoning the symmetric account of efforts of will is excessively high. | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| Kane؛ libertarianism؛ efforts of will؛ luck؛ plural voluntary control | ||
| موضوعات | ||
| فلسفه عمل | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Should Kane Abandon the Symmetry of Efforts of Will | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Neil Campbell | ||
| Professor, Department of Philosophy, Wilfrid Laurier University, Canada. | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| An agent’s efforts of will have long been at the centre of Robert Kane’s influential account of libertarian free will. For several decades it has been a crucial part of his theory that there is a symmetry to these efforts. That is, Kane has long maintained that an agent engaged in an undetermined choice makes a simultaneous and sustained effort to choose and to choose otherwise. In a recent paper Kane abandons this symmetry. I outline and evaluate this change in Kane’s theory. I begin by explaining how Kane’s theory has changed from a symmetric to an asymmetric account of undetermined free choices. I then explore the philosophical benefits of adopting an asymmetric account by considering its implications for the explanatory luck objection, the phenomenological objection, and the objection that engaging in dual efforts of will involves an unacceptable form of irrationality. Finally, I argue that despite these benefits, Kane’s asymmetric model opens the door to a more pervasive worry about luck and it gives up something most libertarians want: the unconditional ability to choose otherwise. Given these points, I conclude the cost of abandoning the symmetric account of efforts of will is excessively high. | ||
| کلیدواژهها [English] | ||
| Kane, libertarianism, efforts of will, luck, plural voluntary control | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Allen, R. (2005). Free will and indeterminism: Robert Kane’s libertarianism. Journal of Philosophical Research, 30, 341-355.
Almeida, M., & Bernstein, M. (2003). Lucky libertarianism. Philosophical Studies: An International Journal for Philosophy in the Analytic Tradition, 113(2), 93-119.
Balaguer, M. (2004). A coherent, naturalistic, and plausible formulation of libertarian free will. Nous, 38(3), 379-406.
Clarke, R. (2003). Libertarian accounts of Ffee will. Oxford University Press.
Dennett, D. C. (2003). Freedom evolves. Viking.
Double, R. (1988). Libertarianism and rationality. Southern Journal of Philosophy, 26(3), 431-439.
Ekstrom, L. (2003). Free will, chance, and mystery. Philosophical Studies, 113(2), 153-180.
Greenspan, P. (2012). Free will and rational coherency. Nous-Supplement: Philosophical Issues, 22, 185-200.
Haji, I. (2000). Indeterminism, explanation, and luck. Journal of Ethics: An International Philosophical Review, 4(3), 211-235.
Haji, I. (2022). Libertarianism and luck. Journal of Philosophical Theological Research, 24(3), 115-134.
Kane, R. (1994). Free will: The elusive ideal. Philosophical Studies: An International Journal for Philosophy in the Analytic Tradition, 75(1-2), 25-60.
Kane, R. (1996). Freedom, responsibility, and will-setting. Philosophical Topics, 24(2), 67-90.
Kane, R. (1998). The significance of free will. Oxford University Press.
Kane, R. (1999). Responsibility, luck, and chance: Reflections on free will and indeterminism. The Journal of Philosophy, 96(5), 217-240.
Kane, R. (2000). The dual regress of free will and the role of alternative possibilities (Volume 14: Action and Freedom). Nous-Supplement: Philosophical Perspectives, 14, 57-79.
Kane, R. (2009). Free will and the dialectic of selfhood: Can one make sense of a tradiaitiona; free will requiring ultimate responsibility? Ideas y Valores, 58(141), 25-43. Kane, R. (2014). Acting ‘of one’s own free will’: Modern reflections on an ancient philosophical problem. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society (Hardback), 114, 35-55.
Kane, R. (2019). The complex tapestry of free will: Striving will, indeterminism and volitional streams. Synthese, 196(1), 145-160.
Kane, R. (2021). Making sense of a free will that is incompatible with determinism: A fourth way forward. Journal of Philosophical Theological Research, 23(89), 5-28. Lemos, J. (2011). Wanting, willing, trying, and Kane’s theory of free will. Dialectica: International Journal of Philosophy of Knowledge, 65(1), 31-48.
Lemos, J. (2021). The indeterministic weightings model of libertarian free will. Journal of Philosophical Theological Research, 23(3), 137-156.
Levy, N. (2005). Contrastive explanations: A dilemma for libertarians. Dialectica: International Journal of Philosophy of Knowledge, 59(1), 51-61.
Mele, A. (2006). Free will and luck. Oxford University Press.
Mele, A. R. (1999). Kane, luck, and the significance of free will. Philosophical Explorations: An International Journal for the Philosophy of Mind and Action, 2(2), 96-104.
Mele, A. R. (2005). Libertarianism, luck, and control. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 86(3), 381-407.
Moore, D. (2021). Libertarian free will and the physical indeterminism luck objection. Philosophia, 50(1), 159-182.
Murday, B. (2017). Can self-forming actions dispel worries about luck? Philosophia, 45(3), 1313-1330. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 9,467 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 312 |
||