Chance, determinism, and unsettledness

Philosophical Studies 176 (3):781-802 (2019)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
A previously unrecognised argument against deterministic chance is introduced. The argument rests on the twin ideas that determined outcomes are settled, while chancy outcomes are unsettled, thus making cases of determined but chancy outcomes impossible. Closer attention to tacit assumptions about settledness makes available some principled lines of resistance to the argument for compatibilists about chance and determinism. Yet the costs of maintaining compatibilism may be higher with respect to this argument than with respect to existing incompatibilist arguments.
Reprint years
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Upload history
First archival date: 2018-01-15
Latest version: 2 (2019-07-25)
View other versions
Added to PP index

Total views
501 ( #13,336 of 65,754 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
24 ( #32,196 of 65,754 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.