ABSTRACT
In this chapter, the author begins by first sketching the dialectic regarding the disputed soundness of Harry Frankfurt’s argument. He introduces a new strategy for developing Frankfurt’s argument. This strategy attempts to meet the best incompatibilist defense of alternative possibilities to date. The author suggests that the Frankfurt-defender attempt to close off all morally significant alternatives without attempting to pollute all alternative actional pathways within an agent’s control. The theoretical advantage the limited blockage strategy offers over other recent Frankfurt example strategies is that limited blockage cases openly grant libertarian freedom involving alternative possibilities. Various replies have emerged in an attempt to join issue with the loci protection strategy. Each acknowledges that a prior triggering sign presupposing a deterministic relation is illicit and that any convincing Frankfurt example must avoid this assumption. Frankfurt developed his attack on alternative possibilities by constructing a kind of example designed to prove false some alternative possibilities condition on moral responsibility.
