C No one has free will This argument is clearly valid. So disagreements will focus on whether or not it is sound; and if it isn’t on which premise(s) should be rejected. Recall the standard terminology. Hard determinists accept the soundness of the argument and so embrace its conclusion. Libertarians deny its conclusion, and do so by denying P4. (Note that it is not enough just to deny determinism. We have to say what to put in its place. And it is quite unclear what could play the role. Certainly thinking that events happen randomly, as quantum mechanics is sometimes held to entail, will not do the job.) Compatibilists deny the conclusion and accept P4—they want to hold that determinism and free will are compatible—and so standardly want to reject one of the other premises; typically P2 or P3 (or both). But some positions that look like compatibilism turn out, on closer examination, to be arguing for the compatibility of determinism with our normal practices of holding people responsible. So such positions seem to be able to accept the
This is the end of the preview. Sign up
access the rest of the document.