Does Frankfurt dissociate free will and moral responsibility?

What did Frankfurt believe about free will?

He is known as a Traditional Compati- bilist because he believes that people have free will only if they are not forced and their actions have been “willed” by them alone.

Does Frankfurt show that moral responsibility does not depend on free will?

A link between moral responsibility and free will. Why, although Frankfurt describes his argument as one which shows that one can be morally responsible even if one could not have done otherwise, it can be also plausibly taken to show that one can act freely even if one could not have done otherwise.

What we are morally responsible for Frankfurt?

Frankfurt 1969): Principle of Alternative Possibilities (PAP): a person is morally responsible for what she has done only if she could have done otherwise. Although its precise form and interpretation have varied, this principle has enjoyed broad support in the history of philosophy.

Does Frankfurt believe in determinism?

Frankfurt’s objection
According to this view, responsibility is compatible with determinism because responsibility does not require the freedom to do otherwise. Frankfurt’s examples involve agents who are intuitively responsible for their behavior even though they lack the freedom to act otherwise.

What is Frankfurt claim about freedom quizlet?

Frankfurt makes a distinction between freedom of action and freedom of will. Freedom of action is the freedom to do what one wants to do. Freedom of will is the freedom to want what one wants to want. Frankfurt also describes freedom of will as the conformity of one’s will to one’s second-order volitions.

What are Frankfurt type examples intended to demonstrate?

Frankfurt-type examples are intended to show that true moral responsibility is possible even if the agent has no genuine alternatives.

How does Frankfurt argue for the conclusion that the principle of alternate possibilities is false?

Frankfurt Cases & the PAP
Harry Frankfurt famously argued that alternate possibilities are not necessary for moral responsibility, and therefore that PAP is false.

What does Frankfurt mean when he uses the term second order volition?

want a certain desire to be one’s will

What does Frankfurt mean when he uses the term “second-order volition”? a. One has a second-order volition when they want a certain desire to be one’s will. b. One has a second-order volition when they want to have a certain desire.

How does Frankfurt see it as related to the meaningfulness of one’s life?

It also has a special value for human beings: for according for Frankfurt, loving things makes a person’s life better, by making it meaningful. The claim that practical reason may be grounded in love, or caring, might be an attractive picture for people whose sympathies are broadly Humean.

How does Wolf define sanity?

To be “sane” in Wolf’s sense is to know what one is doing AND to have beliefs that correctly correspond to the way the world is.

What is a Frankfurt style case?

ABSTRACT. Frankfurt-Style Cases (FSCs) seem to elicit the intuitive judgment that an agent is morally responsible despite being unable to act otherwise, which is supposed to falsify the Principle of Alternative Possibility (PAP).

What are examples of moral responsibilities?

Some relatively uncontroversial ones are moral obligations we have towards our friends, family, and to any moral agent in virtue of their being a moral agent. For example, one may have a moral obligation to help a friend, to support a parent in old age, or to minimally respect another’s autonomy as a moral agent.

What is moral responsibility?

Moral responsibility is about human action and its intentions and consequences (Fisher 1999, Eshleman 2016). Generally speaking a person or a group of people is morally responsible when their voluntary actions have morally significant outcomes that would make it appropriate to blame or praise them.

Does moral responsibility require free will?

without free will there is no moral responsibility: if moral responsibility exists, then someone is morally responsible for something he has done or for something he has left undone; to be morally responsible for some act or failure to act is at least to be able to have acted otherwise, whatever else it may involve; to

Do we have moral responsibility?

Most people would agree that a person cannot be morally responsible for actions that he could not help but perform. Moreover, moral praise and blame, or reward and punishment, seem to make sense only on the assumption that the agent in question is morally responsible.

Why does moral responsibility exist?

Making judgments about whether a person is morally responsible for her behavior, and holding others and ourselves responsible for actions and the consequences of actions, is a fundamental and familiar part of our moral practices and our interpersonal relationships.

What is the relationship between freedom and moral responsibility?

A long-standing position in philosophy, law, and theology is that a person can be held morally responsible for an action only if they had the freedom to choose and to act otherwise. Thus, many philosophers consider freedom to be a necessary condition for moral responsibility.

Do we have free will?

Neuroscientists identified a specific aspect of the notion of freedom (the conscious control of the start of the action) and researched it: the experimental results seemed to indicate that there is no such conscious control, hence the conclusion that free will does not exist.