Episode 5: The Consequence Argument with Peter van Inwagen
Sep 14, 2020
auto_awesome
Philosopher Peter van Inwagen explains the consequence argument for incompatibilism and discusses the problem of freedom and determinism. He explores different versions of the consequence argument, challenges the fixity of laws of nature, and explores the complexities of free will and attributing blame. The podcast also touches on the mind argument, the problem of luck, and references Harry Frankfurt's cases.
The consequence argument shows that if determinism is true, our choices are predetermined and we lack genuine free will.
The challenge of indeterminism highlights that if our actions are undetermined, chance rather than our agency determines our choices, raising questions about control and determinism's impact on free will.
Deep dives
The Consequence Argument for Incompatibilism
The podcast episode explores the consequence argument, which is a powerful argument against the compatibility of free will and determinism. The hosts discuss how the argument shows that if determinism is true, and the past determines the future, then we are not able to have free will. The speaker presents specific examples of decision-making scenarios and highlights how determinism limits our ability to do otherwise. The argument suggests that if determinism is true, our choices are predetermined, leaving no room for genuine free will.
The Challenge of Indeterminism
The podcast episode also raises the challenge of indeterminism to free will. The speaker explains that if our actions are undetermined, and could have gone either way, it seems like chance determines our choices rather than our own agency. The speaker introduces the replay argument, emphasizing that if a decision is undetermined, it could have gone differently upon replaying the scenario multiple times. This raises questions about control and the ability to truly determine our actions if they are subject to chance. Indeterminism, like determinism, presents challenges to the concept of free will.
The Problem of Fault and Responsibility
The podcast episode delves into the problem of fault and responsibility in the context of free will. The speaker highlights that if free will is compromised or non-existent due to determinism or indeterminism, it raises questions about moral blame or fault. The example of a broken promise to feed a cat is used to illustrate how the absence of alternative possibilities undermines the concept of blame. Without the ability to do differently, it becomes challenging to assign fault or responsibility to individuals for their actions. This problem leads to philosophical debates surrounding free will and the implications for attributing moral blame.
In this episode, Peter van Inwagen explains the consequence argument for incompatibilism. Afterwards, he discusses what he takes to be the problem of freedom and determinism.
If you have a question you’d like us to answer in our Q&A episode, get in touch with us at thefreewillshow@gmail.com, via the show’s website: thefreewillshow.com, or through social media: