ABSTRACT
Classical compatibilists agree with incompatibilists that the presence of a distinct process that renders the agent unable to choose otherwise negates the agent’s prima facie freedom conferred by the deliberative process. The great interest engendered by Harry Frankfurt’s counterfactual intervener (CI) scenario is based upon the way it purports to undercut the incompatibilist case by challenging the second inference, to wit, from the absence of alternative possibilities to the absence of freedom and/or moral responsibility. The CI-scenario has been challenged not only by compatibilists who insist that freedom requires alternative possibilities, but also by those who deny that the scenario is possible if Jones really has libertarian-style freedom. Many philosophers would attempt to tilt the picture further in the direction favored by incompatibilists by insisting that the tension between the physical and the intentional must be resolved in favor of the physical.
