Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Despite the importance of Suárez’s defense of the freedom of the will at the threshold of early modern philosophy, his account has received scant recent attention. This paper aims partially to redress that neglect. Suárez’s position can be understood as a balancing act between desiring to attribute libertarian freedom to agents and desiring to maintain the will’s status as a rational appetite. Hence, he rejects an intellectualism that says that choices are necessitated by the intellect’s judgements (since he does not think that the judgements themselves can be directly free), but affirms that only what is judged good can be chosen.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sydney Penner (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: