Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Why causal facts matter

A critique of Jeppsson’s hard-line reply to four-case manipulation arguments

Bibliographic Data

ID21335612
AuthorsSamantha L Seybold (0000-0003-2033-5388, Purdue University, corresponding author)
Year2025
Volume68
Issue7
Pages2160-2172
Publication date2025-08-09
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueInquiry (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0020-174X • E-ISSN: 1502-3923
PublisherInforma UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/0020174x.2022.2152093
OpenAlexW4310524391
LanguageEN
Citations received3
References cited7

This paper poses a series of objections to Sofia Jeppsson’s hard-line reply to Pereboom’s four-case manipulation argument. According to Jeppsson, the compatibilist can resist Pereboom’s argument by disregarding facts about what caused an agent to act (the ‘causal perspective’) and focusing primarily on the agent’s own perspective of their action (the ‘agential perspective’). Jeppsson argues that we have an obligation to disregard the causal perspective. This is for two reasons: (I) we must disregard the causal facts of the agent’s action, including whether they have been manipulated, since the agent has reason to disregard them; and (II) the causal perspective is not obviously relevant to judgments of moral responsibility. In this paper, I show that both (I) and (II) can be undermined because the causal perspective provides information that is necessary for moral deliberations. This is because it would seem that at least one necessary condition for an agent to be considered morally responsible is that the agent’s actions are not fully controlled by someone else. Since this is information that we can only obtain via the causal perspective, we do not have an obligation to disregard this perspective and so need not accept the compatibilist’s hard-line account

Action (physics) · Argument (complex analysis) · Causal analysis · Compatibilism · Economics · Epistemology · Law and economics · Moral obligation · Moral responsibility · Obligation · Perspective (graphical) · Political science · Sociology · Computer Science · Free Will and Agency · Law · Neuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical Innovations · Philosophy · War, Ethics, and Justification

  • On the manipulator-focused response to manipulation cases

    Open Access•Gabriel De Marco, Taylor W Cyr•Philosophical Studies•2024

  • Manipulation cases in free will and moral responsibility, part 2

    Open Access•Gabriel De Marco, Taylor W Cyr•Philosophy Compass•2024

  • Manipulation Cases in Free Will and Moral Responsibility, Part 1

    Open Access•Gabriel De Marco, Taylor W Cyr•Philosophy Compass•2024

  • Free Will, Agency, and Meaning in Life

    Derk Pereboom•Free Will, Agency, and Meaning in…•2014

  • Alternate Possibilities and Moral Responsibility

    Harry G Frankfurt•The Journal of Philosophy•1969

  • A Hard‐line Reply to Pereboom’s Four‐Case Manipulation Argument 1

    Open Access•Michael Mckenna•Philosophy and Phenomenological…•2008

Citations per year1.5
Citation span2024 - 2024 (1)
Highly citedNo

Tools

Open DOI
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae