Coercion and Volition in Law and Philosophy

Amit Pundik

doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/cjlj.2018.5

Coercion and Volition in Law and Philosophy

Amit Pundik

Faculty of Law

Tel Aviv University

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

This paper discusses cases in which defendants were coerced to do something they wanted to do anyway. Through these cases a stark divergence between the legal and philosophical discussion of alternative possibilities is highlighted. The paper seeks to vindicate the legal approach to coercion and volition by showing that the legal approach could be accounted for with an epistemic version of the Principle of Alternative Possibilities, a version which is also immune to Frankfurt-type examples.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	107-123
Number of pages	17
Journal	Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence
Volume	31
Issue number	1
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1017/cjlj.2018.5
State	Published - 2018

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

Law

Access to Document

https://doi.org/10.1017/cjlj.2018.5

Cite this

@article{7f4fa8363b9a40b98aa5536adaa01e8d,

title = "Coercion and Volition in Law and Philosophy",

abstract = "This paper discusses cases in which defendants were coerced to do something they wanted to do anyway. Through these cases a stark divergence between the legal and philosophical discussion of alternative possibilities is highlighted. The paper seeks to vindicate the legal approach to coercion and volition by showing that the legal approach could be accounted for with an epistemic version of the Principle of Alternative Possibilities, a version which is also immune to Frankfurt-type examples.",

author = "Amit Pundik",

note = "Publisher Copyright: Copyright {\textcopyright} Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence 2018.",

year = "2018",

doi = "https://doi.org/10.1017/cjlj.2018.5",

language = "الإنجليزيّة",

volume = "31",

pages = "107--123",

journal = "Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence",

issn = "0841-8209",

publisher = "Cambridge University Press",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Coercion and Volition in Law and Philosophy

AU - Pundik, Amit

PY - 2018

Y1 - 2018

N2 - This paper discusses cases in which defendants were coerced to do something they wanted to do anyway. Through these cases a stark divergence between the legal and philosophical discussion of alternative possibilities is highlighted. The paper seeks to vindicate the legal approach to coercion and volition by showing that the legal approach could be accounted for with an epistemic version of the Principle of Alternative Possibilities, a version which is also immune to Frankfurt-type examples.

AB - This paper discusses cases in which defendants were coerced to do something they wanted to do anyway. Through these cases a stark divergence between the legal and philosophical discussion of alternative possibilities is highlighted. The paper seeks to vindicate the legal approach to coercion and volition by showing that the legal approach could be accounted for with an epistemic version of the Principle of Alternative Possibilities, a version which is also immune to Frankfurt-type examples.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85054684248&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - https://doi.org/10.1017/cjlj.2018.5

DO - https://doi.org/10.1017/cjlj.2018.5

M3 - مقالة

SN - 0841-8209

VL - 31

SP - 107

EP - 123

JO - Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence

JF - Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence

IS - 1

ER -

Coercion and Volition in Law and Philosophy

Abstract

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this