Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. John Dewey’s Conception of Scientific Explanation: Moving Philosophers of Science Past the Realism-Antirealism Debate.Mark Dietrich Tschaepe - 2011 - Contemporary Pragmatism 8 (2):187-203.
    John Dewey provided a robust and thorough conception of scientific explanation within his philosophical writing. I provide an exegesis of Dewey's concept of scientific explanation and argue that this concept is important to contemporary philosophy of science for at least two reasons. First, Dewey's conception of scientific explanation avoids the reification of science as an entity separated from practical experience. Second, Dewey supplants the realist-antirealist debate within the philosophical literature concerning explanation, thus moving us beyond the current stalemate within philosophy (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Against representation: A brief introduction to cultural affordances.Tibor Solymosi - 2013 - Human Affairs 23 (4):594-605.
    Cognitive science and its philosophy have been far too long consumed with representation. This concern is indicative of a creeping Cartesianism that many scientists and philosophers wish to evade. However, their naturalism is often insufficiently evolutionary to fully appreciate the lessons of pragmatism. If cognitive neuroscience and pragmatism are to be mutually beneficial, the representational-friendly scientists and the anti-representational pragmatists need an alternative to representation that still accounts for what many find so attractive about representation, namely intentionality. I propose that (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • Jane Addams as experimental philosopher.Joshua August Skorburg - 2018 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 26 (5):918-938.
    This paper argues that the activist, feminist and pragmatist Jane Addams was an experimental philosopher. To defend this claim, I argue for capacious notions of both philosophical pragmatism and experimental philosophy. I begin in Section 2 with a new defence of Rose and Danks’ [‘In Defense of a Broad Conception of Experimental Philosophy’. Metaphilosophy 44, no. 4 : 512–32] argument in favour of a broad conception of experimental philosophy. Koopman [‘Pragmatist Resources for Experimental Philosophy: Inquiry in Place of Intuition’. Journal (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Neuropragmatism, knowledge, and pragmatic naturalism.John Shook - 2013 - Human Affairs 23 (4):576-593.
    Neuropragmatism is a research program taking sciences about cognitive development and learning methods most seriously, in order to reevaluate and reformulate philosophical issues. Knowledge, consciousness, and reason are among the crucial philosophical issues directly affected. Pragmatism in general has allied with the science-affirming philosophy of naturalism. Naturalism is perennially tested by challenges questioning its ability to accommodate and account for knowledge, consciousness, and reason. Neuropragmatism is in a good position to evaluate those challenges. Some ways to defuse them are suggested (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Robert Cummings Neville, Defining Religion: Essays in Philosophy of Religion: SUNY Press, Albany and New York, 2018, xvi + 363 pp, $95 , $29.95.J. Aaron Simmons - 2019 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 85 (2):271-277.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • In defense of provisory methodological naturalism.Eric Christopher Eck - unknown
    Methodological naturalists generally believe that science is the best and only method for discovering the properties of reality and what exists. A central tenet of methodological naturalism is that science is limited to evaluating only natural things. Science cannot allow for the possibility of supernatural objects because doing so would irreparably damage the scientific method. Or, it may be that evaluating the supernatural is beyond the capabilities of science. In this thesis, I challenge these assumptions. I defend a form of (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark