A timid response to the consequence argument |
| |
Authors: | Michael McKenna |
| |
Institution: | University of Arizona |
| |
Abstract: | In this paper, I challenge the Consequence Argument for Incompatibilism by arguing that the inference principle it relies upon is not well motivated. The sorts of non-question-begging instances that might be offered in support of it fall short. |
| |
Keywords: | |
|
|