Can the incompatibilist get past the no past objection?


Research output: Journal PublicationsJournal Article (refereed)peer-review

2 Citations (Scopus)


I refute Bailey's claim that his argument for incompatibilism is immune to Campbell's No Past Objection. In my refutation I stress a simple point, that nomological necessitation by future world states does not undermine one's freedom with respect to the present world state. My analysis reveals that the No Past Objection challenges van Inwagen's second consequence argument about as much as it does the others, and suggests that the (uncompromising) incompatibilist must pursue some of the options that Bailey regarded as costly in order to overcome the No Past Objection.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)345-352
Number of pages8
Issue number3
Early online date21 Oct 2013
Publication statusPublished - 21 Oct 2013


Dive into the research topics of 'Can the incompatibilist get past the no past objection?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this