Abstract

This discussion of Doris’s work focusses on his account of empirical problems for agency. I argue that Doris’s account of agency is too weak to genuinely count as a form of agency. Furthermore, I speculate that the empirical evidence may not be as compelling as Doris thinks. In the end, I suggest that we need a traditional account of agency and an account of how we can buttress our own agency in the face of distractions.