Whose Argumentative Burden, which Incompatibilist Arguments?—Getting the Dialectic Right.

Kadri Vihvelin has recently argued that between compatibilists and incompatibilists, the incompatibilists have a greater dialectical burden than compatibilists. According to her, both must show that free will is possible, but beyond this the incompatibilists must also show that no deterministic worl...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Australasian Journal of Philosophy Vol. 88; no. 3; pp. 429 - 444
Main Author: McKenna, Michael
Format: Article
Published: Taylor & Francis Ltd Sep2010
Subjects:
Online Access:View this record in EBSCOhost
Description
Summary:Kadri Vihvelin has recently argued that between compatibilists and incompatibilists, the incompatibilists have a greater dialectical burden than compatibilists. According to her, both must show that free will is possible, but beyond this the incompatibilists must also show that no deterministic worlds are free will worlds. Thus, according to Vihvelin, so long as it is established that free will is possible, all the compatibilist must do is show that the incompatibilists' arguments are ineffective. I resist Vihvelin's assessment of the dialectical burdens of compatibilists and incompatibilists, as well as her assessment of the best arguments for incompatibilism.