Luck as Risk and the Lack of Control Account of Luck

Abstract

This essay explains the notion of luck in terms of risk. It starts by distinguishing two senses of risk, the risk that an event has of occurring and the risk at which an agent is with respect to an event. It cashes out the former in modal terms (rather than probabilistic) and the latter in terms of lack of control. It then argues that the presence or absence of event‐relative risk marks a distinction between two types of luck or fortune commonly overlooked in ordinary usage of the terms “luck” and “fortune.” After offering a detailed account of the notion of control, the essay advances a new version of the so‐called lack of control account of luck: lucky events are events with respect to which one is at risk and hence events over which one lacks control in the specified way. Finally, it argues that its account steers clear of counterexamples to the lack of control account of luck.

Luck and Risk

“…Pritchard follows the standard trend when he considers events as the objects of luck and risk assessments, although some authors—like Broncano‐Berrocal (, sec. 1a; , 4)—prefer to consider agents as the proper objects of those attributions. What I am proposing here is a third alternative: in my view, situations—not events or agents—are the primary bearers of luck and risk attributions.…”

Towards a Hybrid Account of Luck

“… In addition to the accounts mentioned, it is common to distinguish a separate lack‐of‐control account of luck (e.g. Broncano‐Berrocal, 2015; Hales, 2016). Among authors defending this latter account, some take lack of control to be necessary for luck (Broncano‐Berrocal, 2015; Coffman, 2007; Levy, 2011), with others sufficient as well (Greco, 2010; Riggs, 2007, 2009).…”

What’s Wrong with Modal Conceptions of Luck and Risk

“…But even if we do say such a thing, I am skeptical that the ascription of luck here is really attributable to the closeness of the counterfactual event. Instead, I think we consider subject one's true belief to be lucky because we attach (whether explicitly or implicitly) some kind of significance to true beliefs.28 Of course, according to earlier formulations of the modal account, the truth of subject one's belief would also not be considered a matter of luck since her belief would be true in a wide range of nearby possible worlds.29 Coffman (2007),Pritchard (2014Pritchard ( , 2015Pritchard ( , 2016,Broncano-Berrocal (2015).30 Of course, there is a chance that the subject will walk on without spotting the money on the sidewalk, but it is a stretch to say there is a risk that she will not spot the money.…”