Alfred Mele: Two Equivocations in the Dispute over the Weakness of Will

Abstract

The paper provides a commentary on two equivocations relevant to Alfred Mele’s argumentation in the dispute over the problem of weakness of will. The first one, concerning the notion of desire (used in either an evaluative or motivational sense), allows Mele to demonstrate the invalidity of the objections against the possibility of weak-willed action. The second, referring to the notion of rationality (understood either as explainability in intentional categories or as the internal consistency of the agent), is found in Mele’s own argumentation. As a consequence, Mele is able to counter the arguments against the possibility of weak-willed action but does not provide sufficient grounds for recognizing acratic actions as irrational.