An argument Kane rejects

1. (Premise) If my choice is undetermined, then I could have made a different choice with exactly the same past.

2. (Premise) But if the same state can lead to more than one outcome, then this is a matter of chance not rational choice.

3. Therefore, if my choice is undetermined, it is not a rational choice.

A consequence argument (Finch and Warfield’s modification of van Inwagen’s argument)

Let F be any truth.  Let P be a complete description of the world in the distant past.  Let L be the laws of nature.  Let Np be the claim that “p and no one has, or ever had, any choice about whether p.”

1. (Premise) Necessarily(P&L à F).
2. (Premise) N(P&L).
3. (Premise) If Np and Necessarily(p à q), then Nq.
4. NF. (By 1-3)

A randomness argument

1. An action determined by rationally irrelevant factors is random for purposes of responsibility.

2. Many actions that we hold people responsible for are determined by rationally irrelevant factors if determinism is true.

3. So, many actions that we hold people responsible for are random if determinism is true.