ABSTRACT
This chapter wants to take a narrower focus in particular James's arguments for freedom, particularly those offered in his essay "The Dilemma of Determinism". The chapter focuses on Kant's argument in the Critique of Practical Reason centres on the example of a man, asked to give false testimony, on pain of immediate execution. Kant's final position involves an evidentialism concerning our freedom however, where that evidentialism takes a practical form, based on the way the practical reason tells us that there are ways in which we ought to act. The chapter presents, one potential difficulty with James's argument, it is that it hinges on regret, and the claim that this "moral belief" only makes sense if things could have been otherwise. However, the way of putting things brings out an important difference between Kant on the one hand, and James and Strawson on the other, where this difference gives Kant another way of handling the problem.
