The Direct Argument and the burden of proof

Analysis 72 (1):25-36 (2012)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Peter van Inwagen's Direct Argument (DA) for incompatibilism purports to establish incompatibilism with respect to moral responsibility and determinism without appealing to assumptions that compatibilists usually consider controversial. Recently, Michael McKenna has presented a novel critique of DA. McKenna's critique raises important issues about philosophical dialectics. In this article, we address those issues and contend that his argument does not succeed

Author's Profile

David Widerker
Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-08-18

Downloads
759 (#10,072)

6 months
75 (#13,821)

Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?