The Argument of Luck vs the Consequence Argument. Sekatskaya M.

15 June, 2018

These arguments pursue opposite goals. The argument of luck tends to show that if determinism is true, then our actions are the result of luck, contingency, and, therefore, free will simply dissolves into contingency and, therefore, disappears. The consequence argument claims that if indeterminism is true, then the facts of the past, along with the laws of nature, determine the future. But since we do not determine the facts of the past and the laws of nature, therefore, we do not determine our future, and therefore we do not have the free will. In her report, Maria Secatskaya tries to find a way out of this situation.

More on this topic


Mind, Brain and Free Will. Research Seminar of the Center for Consciousness Studies

The seminar has been devoted to the book of the distinguished Oxford philosopher Richard Swinburne “Mind, Brain and Free Will”. Swinburn takes an unpopular position for nowdays, defending the subs...
May 2018

Conference on The Personal Identity Problem. Recordings of the Presentations

The problem of personal identity is one of the most discussed in contemporary philosophy. It includes questions about the Self, personality, its identity in time and its unity. On May 17, 2018 at...
May 2018