Abstract
Dispositional compatibilists argue that a proper understanding of our abilities vindicates both compatibilism and the principle of Alternate Possibilities (the claim that the ability to do otherwise is required for freedom and moral responsibility). In this paper, I argue that this is mistaken. Both analyses of dispositions and abilities should distinguish between local and global dispositions or abilities. Once this distinction is in place, we see that neither thesis is established by an analysis of abilities.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 1-23 |
Number of pages | 23 |
Journal | Philosophers' Imprint |
Volume | 10 |
Issue number | 12 |
Publication status | Published - Dec 2010 |