Frankfurt Cases and Alternate Deontic Categories

dc.contributor.authorKahn, Samuel
dc.contributor.departmentPhilosophy, School of Liberal Arts
dc.date.accessioned2025-01-10T19:43:07Z
dc.date.available2025-01-10T19:43:07Z
dc.date.issued2023-12
dc.description.abstractIn Harry Frankfurt’s seminal “Alternate Possibilities and Moral Responsibility,” he advances an argument against the Principle of Alternate Possibilities: if an agent is responsible for performing some action, then she is able to do otherwise. However, almost all of the Frankfurt cases in this literature involve impermissible actions. In this article, I argue that the failure to consider other deontic categories exposes a deep problem, one that threatens either to upend much current moral theorizing or to upend the relevance of Frankfurt cases.
dc.eprint.versionAuthor's manuscript
dc.identifier.citationKahn, S. (2023). Frankfurt Cases and Alternate Deontic Categories. Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review / Revue Canadienne de Philosophie, 62(3), 539–552. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0012217323000112
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1805/45253
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherCambridge
dc.relation.isversionof10.1017/S0012217323000112
dc.relation.journalDialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review
dc.rightsPublisher Policy
dc.sourceAuthor
dc.subjectFrankfurt cases
dc.subjectmere permissibility
dc.subjectprinciple of alternate possibilities (PAP)
dc.titleFrankfurt Cases and Alternate Deontic Categories
dc.typeArticle
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Kahn2023Frankfurt-AAM.pdf
Size:
108.91 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
2.04 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: