ABSTRACT
This chapter discusses the logical incoherence involved in the doctrine of acts of volition: Acts of volition are alleged to be direct causes of certain bodily phenomena, just as the latter are causes of the raising of one's arm. The doctrine of acts of volition was introduced, it will be remembered, in order to elucidate the distinction between one's arm rising and one's raising one's arm. By willing, we move certain muscles; by moving certain muscles we raise our arm. But the acts of volition in question are the ill-begotten offspring of the mating of two quite incompatible ideas: the supposition that such acts are causes, and the requirement that the volitions in question be the willings of the muscle movements. As causes, willings are events on a par with other events including muscle and other bodily movements, with respect to which the inevitable question must arise once more.
