A lost lesson in Keith Lehrer's reply to the consequence argument

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

In this article, the author examines Keith Lehrer's response to the Consequence Argument. He argues that his response has advantages over David Lewis's. Contrary to what Lewis suggests in a footnote, Lehrer's assessment of an ability to affect the laws of nature in deterministic settings is largely the same as Lewis's. However, Lehrer's position has an advantage that Lewis's lacks. Lehrer integrates his proposal within a positive account of freedom, and this helps to explain how it could be that an agent is able to do otherwise in deterministic settings in such a way that if she did, some law of nature would be different.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)545-558
Number of pages14
JournalGrazer Philosophische Studien
Volume97
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - 2020

Keywords

  • Ability to do otherwise
  • David Lewis
  • Determinism
  • Free will
  • Keith lehrer
  • Laws of nature

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Philosophy

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'A lost lesson in Keith Lehrer's reply to the consequence argument'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this