No CrossRef data available.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 17 March 2021
1 Ertl explicitly points out the ambiguity in the word ‘determines’ here, carefully separating its metaphysical and epistemological meanings, and tracking them throughout Kant’s discussion.
2 For reasons of space, I will not discuss the fifth threat.
3 Ertl thus endorses the ‘altered laws’ rather than the ‘altered past’ response to Van Inwagen’s Consequence Argument.
4 In his defence, Ertl acknowledges the importance of this issue.