Four Views on Free Will

The question of free will– what it is, if it can exist, and if humans have it– has always sparked debate from philosophers and theologians; advances in cognitive science have served to sharpen the conversation. There are a number of common core arguments about the nature or existence of free will, and this volume takes an interactive look at the debate between four representative views. The first half of the book contains each philosopher′s explanation of his particular view; the second half allows them to directly respond to each other′s arguments, in a lively and engaging conversation. Focusing on the concepts and interactions of free will, moral responsibility, and determinism, this text represents the most up–to–date account of the major positions in the free will debate. The book takes up the opposing viewpoints of libertarianism, defended by Robert Kane; compatibilism, defended by John Martin Fischer; hard incompatibilism, defended by Manuel Vargas; and revisionism, defended by Derk Pereboom. Original and compelling, Four Views on Free Will offers a balanced and enlightening discussion on all of the critical concepts and conflicts in the free will debate.

Notes on Contributors. Acknowledgments. A Brief Introduction to Some Terms and Concepts. 1. Libertarianism ((Robert Kane). 2. Compatibilism (John Martin Fischer). 3. Hard Incompatibilism (Derk Pereboom). 4. Revisionism (Manuel Vargas). 5. Response to Fischer, Pereboom, and Vargas (Robert Kane). 6. Response to Kane, Pereboom, and Vargas (John Martin Fischer). 7. Response to Kane, Fischer, and Vargas (Derk Pereboom). 8. Response to Kane, Fischer, and Pereboom (Manuel Vargas). Bibliography. Index.

John Martin Fischer is Distinguished Professor of Philosophy at the University of California, Riverside, where he is a holder of a UC President′s Chair. He is the author of The Metaphysics of Free Will: An Essay on Control (Blackwell 1994); Responsibility and Control: A Theory of Moral Responsibility (with Mark Ravizza, 1998); and My Way: Essays on Moral Responsibility (2006). He has written extensively on free will, moral responsibility, the metaphysics of death, ethics, and the philosophy of religion. Robert Kane is University Distinguished Teaching Professor at the The University of Texas at Austin. He is the author of Free Will and Values (1985), Through the Moral Maze (1994), The Significance of Free Will (1996), A Contemporary Introduction to Free Will (2005) and editor of The Oxford Handbook of Free Will (2002) and a collection of readings, Free Will (Blackwell, 2002). He is a member of the Academy of Distinguished Teachers at the University of Texas at Austin. Derk Pereboom is Professor of Philosophy at the University of Vermont, where he has been since 1985. He will join the Sage School of Philosophy at Cornell University in 2007. His book, Living Without Free Will (Cambridge University Press) appeared in 2001, and he has published articles on free will, philosophy of mind, history of modern philosophy, and philosophy of religion. Manuel Vargas is Associate Professor of Philosophy at the University of San Francisco. He has published articles on a range of topics, including free will and moral responsibility, practical reason, evil, and Latin American philosophy.

This book presents four recent positions on free will in a clear and accessible way, along with their authors’ responses to each other’s position. The discussion carries the discussion of the free will problem forward, and moreover raises interesting metaphilosophical questions about the debate itself: Where is this debate going? Where might it go next? Where should it go next? ( Metaphilosophy , January 2009) Four Views on Free Will serves as an excellent introduction to many of the central issues in the contemporary free will and moral responsibility literature. It is very readable; the chapters are approachable for advanced undergraduates or graduate students, and it has a very helpful and thorough index for cross–referencing topics between the various chapters. ( Social Theory and Practice , April 2009) The four main essays are clearly written and argued, and the shorter articles are very useful as illustrations of how philosophers debate. Highly recommended. (Choice Reviews)