Abstract
In previous work, I presented a challenge for philosophers who appeal to the Frankfurt-style cases (FSCs) in order to undermine the Principle of Alternative Possibilities (PAP). My challenge relied on the claim that there are cases of omitting to act in which the agent is not responsible for her behavior (or lack thereof) and which should yield the same verdict regarding responsibility as the Frankfurt-style cases. In this paper I take a closer look at particular accounts of responsibility for omissions on offer in the literature and argue that they fail to overcome my challenge. In particular I focus on accounts offered by Fischer and Ravizza, Randolph Clarke, and Carolina Sartorio.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
