Alternate Possibilities and Moral Responsibility

Harry Frankfurt's paper, "Alternate Possibilities and Moral Responsibility," challenges the traditional view that moral responsibility requires the ability to do otherwise. Frankfurt argues that an agent can be morally responsible even if they could not have acted differently, as long as their actions stem from their own desires and will.1

He illustrates this with a thought experiment involving a neuroscientist who implants a device in a person's brain that will force them to vote a certain way if they show any inclination to vote differently. If the person votes as desired without the device intervening, they are still considered responsible, even though they lacked the ability to choose otherwise.1

Frankfurt's work suggests that moral responsibility is more about the agent's internal psychological states and their identification with their desires, rather than the external possibility of acting differently.12