Finking Frankfurt

Daniel Cohen*, Toby Handfield

*Corresponding author for this work

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    30 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Michael Smith has resisted Harry Frankfurt's claim that moral responsibility does not require the ability to have done otherwise. He does this by claiming that, in Frankfurt cases, the ability to do otherwise is indeed present, but is a disposition that has been 'finked' or masked by other factors. We suggest that, while Smith's account appears to work for some classic Frankfurt cases, it does not work for all. In particular, Smith cannot explain cases, such as the Willing Addict, where the Frankfurt devise - e.g. the addiction - is intrinsic to the agent.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)363-374
    Number of pages12
    JournalPhilosophical Studies
    Volume135
    Issue number3
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - Sept 2007

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Finking Frankfurt'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this