-
Essay / Alternative Possibilities and Moral Responsibility by...
In “Alternative Possibilities and Moral Responsibility”, Harry Frankfurt attempts to falsify the principle of alternative possibilities. The Principle of Alternative Possibilities is the principle that a person is only morally responsible for what he or she has done if he or she could have done otherwise. A person would be morally responsible for their own actions if they did them themselves. If someone else forced him to perform the action, then the person performing the action is not morally responsible. Frankfurt does not believe that this is true and that the person who acts is morally responsible. Frankfurt's objections to the principle of alternative possibilities show the refutation of natural intuition and place moral responsibility on those who deserve it. The Frankfurt example “Black and Jones” is an apt explanation of how the principle of alternative possibilities works. Black put a gun to Jones' head and told him to do action A. According to the principle of alternative possibilities, this will go one of three ways. If Jones was not a reasonable man and was "enthusiastic", without regard for the consequences or costs, then he should not be morally responsible for this act. If Jones was afraid of what Black would do with the gun and decided to change his decision to take any further action to action A, then he is only morally responsible for the decision he made earlier and not for the 'action. If Jones is not affected by Black's actions, but takes those actions into account in planning his next move while following his initial decision, then he is morally responsible for all actions and decisions. (Frankfurt; Watson, 169-170). Frankfurt considers as a counterexample to the principle of alternative possibility...... middle of paper ...... what moral responsibility. One must desire other alternative possibilities, knowing that there is no moral responsibility for them, to show that the original will has a moral responsibility. It's like placing a white stone on a pile of black stones to emphasize the fact that this stone is a white stone. This shows the need for alternative possibilities and strengthens Frankfurt's argument. In conclusion, Frankfurt's argument against the principle of alternative possibilities showed that people under duress had moral responsibility for their own actions. Copp attributed the value of moral responsibility to the capacity to be able to do one's will, and Pereboom supports Frankfurt's argument by placing the robustness condition on alternative possibilities. This shows that there is still a need for more thought and thought into the question of who has moral responsibility..