Title: Compatibilism and Incompatibilism are compatible. : philosophy
Headings: Compatibilism and Incompatibilism are compatible.
Compatibilism and Incompatibilism are compatible.
Compatibilism and Incompatibilism are compatible.
This thread is archived

Content: I had a professor a few years ago who asked me to write a paper criticizing Frankfurt's view on free will. When he gave it back to me with all of the potential objections Frankfurt could make pointed out, I was confused. It seemed like Frankfurt could say pretty much anything he wanted to as long as he was internally consistent. My professor kept mentioning "desiderata" that Frankfurt's theory met or did not meet, but what are those and where do they come from? So would you say that philosophical questions, or at least many philosophical questions, arise out of clusters of concerns that we develop, and then solutions are judged by how well they resolve those clusters of concerns? This doesn't have to be the case for all philosophical issues - Zeno's paradox is clearly not actually a concern to anyone - but perhaps many of them. Continue this thread
level 2
[deleted]
6 points · 6 years ago
| there is literally no way they can coherently be held simultaneously. If all the definitions of the terms stay consistent from view to view. " David went to the store" and "David didn't go to the store" can be coherently believed simultaneously if the David from one statement is not the same referent as the David from the other. This is what I think is happening with the compatibilist/incompatibilist notions of free will.