Thursday, November 19, 2009

Frankfurt’s assertion: the “principle of alternate possibilities” is false!

The principle of alternate possibilities means that, in relation with the person’s Free -Will, a person is morally responsible for what he has done only if he could have done otherwise. And this principle according to Frankfurt is false because a person may well be responsible for what he has done even though he could not have done otherwise. Frankfurt is correct when says that the principle of alternate possibilities is false for the fact that the true meaning of moral responsibility is: evil is evil regardless of how one justifies it, the end does not justify the means. It is not that one is only morally responsible when in spite of the possibilities or choices at hand he still does evil. Without possibilities or choices and with possibilities or choices by the mere fact one does evil, he is morally responsible.
Coercion into doing something or impelled to act by a hypnotic suggestion or inner compulsion drives one to do what he does may lessen the person’s culpability but not free him from any responsibility of his act. For example, Frank is hungry. And in front of him are the possibilities to solve his hunger: by stealing food, by asking food and by working to earn the money in buying food. And it happens that he chooses to steal the food to solve his hunger. According to the principle of alternate possibilities he is morally responsible because he has choices but for Frankfurt even without the presence of the possibilities and the only possibility is to steal the food that would solve his hunger then he is morally responsible. Another example, a Priest would decide not to celebrate Mass even if it is his schedule to celebrate mass. The principle of alternate possibilities would only bring that priest responsible of his action when in front of him are possibilities or choices and still decide not to celebrate the mass. However, Frankfurt’s assertion would tell us that even if the priest is without possibilities or choices and decides not to celebrate the mass, he is responsible of his action: a person is morally responsible for what he has done even if he could not have done it otherwise.

No comments:

Post a Comment