Frankfurt Cases and Alternate Deontic Categories
dc.contributor.author | Kahn, Samuel | |
dc.contributor.department | Philosophy, School of Liberal Arts | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2025-01-10T19:43:07Z | |
dc.date.available | 2025-01-10T19:43:07Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2023-12 | |
dc.description.abstract | In 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.version | Author's manuscript | |
dc.identifier.citation | Kahn, 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.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/1805/45253 | |
dc.language.iso | en | |
dc.publisher | Cambridge | |
dc.relation.isversionof | 10.1017/S0012217323000112 | |
dc.relation.journal | Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review | |
dc.rights | Publisher Policy | |
dc.source | Author | |
dc.subject | Frankfurt cases | |
dc.subject | mere permissibility | |
dc.subject | principle of alternate possibilities (PAP) | |
dc.title | Frankfurt Cases and Alternate Deontic Categories | |
dc.type | Article |