PHL B60 Lec 4 Oct 3, 2011
-notes that most assume the CHDO principle is correct
-Van Inwagen’s argument for free will is incompatible with determinism and
assumes that CHDO is correct
-compatibilists typically accept CHDO and show that “able to do otherwise” (free will) is
compatible with determinism
-S could have done X
-If S had chosen to have done X, S would have done X
-if determinism is true, the antecedent of the conditional is always false.
(smith never chooses to save the drowning child).
-This is compatible with the truth of the conditional b/c there are different
kinds of conditional statements:
-when presented with an if-then statement that isnt qualified as a particular kind
of conditional, you can assume that it is a material conditional.
Material Conditionals are true if:
-P, then Q is true just in case P is false or Q is true
So is this true?:
-if the antecedent is false, but the consequent is true, so if 2+2= 5, then pigs can fly
-yes it is true ex. if P then Q= true
ex. if not P then not Q=true
ex. if not P then Q=true
ex. if P then not Q= not true
If smith had chosen to save the drowning child, he would have chosen to save the
Why is this true whether or not determinism is true? b/c it is of the form if not P
then not Q which is still a true statement.
-what does Dennett mean by “special pleading”
-”Ad Hoc” is latin for “to this”. This means something like: in response to a specific
-an ad hoc committee is one that is formed just in response to a