Abstract
The philosophical debate over the compatibility between causaldeterminism and moral responsibility relies heavily on ourreactions to examples. Although we believe that there is noalternative to this methodology in this area of philosophy, someexamples that feature prominently in the literature are positivelymisleading. In this vein, we criticize the use that incompatibilistsmake of the phenomenon of ``brainwashing,'' as well as the Frankfurt-styleexamples favored by compatibilists. We provide an instance of thekind of thought experiment that is needed to genuinely test thehypothesis that moral accountability and causal determinism arecompatible.
Similar content being viewed by others
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Black, S., Tweedale, J. Responsibility and Alternative Possibilities: The Use and Abuse of Examples. The Journal of Ethics 6, 281–303 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1019517230380
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1019517230380