Controlling the Control

nor’s version against several objections raised by David Widerker. More spe-cifically, I try to show that we can overcome difficulties raised by the question whether an agent has a control over controlling doing action E, by objection of possible nomically sufficient condition for obtaining of E and by objection of possible logically or metaphysically sufficient condition for obtaining of E. KEY WORDS: Agent-causal libertarianism, control, logically sufficient condition, nomically sufficient condition, strong agent-causal libertarianism. Agent-causal libertarianism is defended recently very much by Timothy O’Connor (1995, 1996, 2000). On the other hand, David Widerker (2005) thinks that O’Connor didn’t provide a successful version of agent-causal libertarianism. I think that Widerker’s attack is not so successful and strong as it seems. So, in the first part I shall expose O’Connor’s version of agent-causal libertarianism; in the second part I shall present several Widerker’s counterarguments, and I shall try to show why I do not find this attack so convincing.