Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-45l2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T21:20:39.427Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

NO CROSS-CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN THE GETTIER CAR CASE INTUITION: A REPLICATION STUDY OF WEINBERG ET AL. 2001

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 March 2015

Minsun Kim  and
Yuan Yuan
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In “Normativity and Epistemic Intuitions” (NEI), Weinberg, Nichols and Stich famously argue from empirical data that East Asians and Westerners have different intuitions about Gettier-style cases. We attempted to replicate their study about the Gettier Car Case. Our study used the same methods and case taken verbatim, but sampled an East Asian population 2.5 times greater than NEI's 23 participants. We found no evidence supporting the existence of cross-cultural difference about the intuition concerning the case. Taken together with the failures of both of the existing replication studies (Nagel et al. 2013; Seyedsayamdost 2014), our data provide strong evidence that the purported cross-cultural difference in intuitions about Gettier-style cases does not exist.

Type
Articles
Information
Episteme , Volume 12 , Issue 3 , September 2015 , pp. 355 - 361
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Adleberg, T., Thompson, M., and Nahmias, E. Forthcoming. ‘Do Men and Women Have Different Philosophical Intuitions? Further Data.’ Philosophical Psychology.Google Scholar
Cappelen, H. 2014. ‘X-phi without Intuitions?’ In Booth, A. and Rowbottom, D. (eds), Intuitions, pp. 269–86. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Doyen, S., Klein, O., Pichon, C.-L. and Cleeremans, A. 2012. ‘Behavioral Priming: It's All in the Mind, but Whose Mind?’ PLoS ONE, 7: e29081.Google Scholar
Gettier, E. 1963. ‘Is Justified True Belief Knowledge?’ Analysis, 23: 121–3.Google Scholar
Kauppinen, A. 2007. ‘The Rise and Fall of Experimental Philosophy.’ Philosophical Explorations, 10: 95–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mott, C. 2014. ‘Replications in Experimental Philosophy.’ Available at http://pantheon.yale.edu/~jk762/xphipage/Experimental%20Philosophy-Replications.html.Google Scholar
Nagel, J., San Juan, V., and Mar, R. A. 2013. ‘Lay Denial of Knowledge for Justified True Beliefs.’ Cognition, 129: 652–11.Google Scholar
Seyedsayamdost, H. 2014. ‘On Normativity and Epistemic Intuitions: Failure of Replication.’ Episteme. Published early online. doi: 10.1017/epi.2014.27.Google Scholar
Simonsohn, U. 2013. ‘Small Telescopes: Detectability and the Evaluation of Replication Results.’ Available at SSRN: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2259879.Google Scholar
Starmans, C. and Friedman, O. 2012. ‘The folk conception of knowledge.’ Cognition, 13: 272–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turri, J. 2013. ‘A conspicuous Art: Putting Gettier to the Test.’ Philosophers' Imprint, 13: 1–16.Google Scholar
Weinberg, J., Nichols, S. and Stich, S. 2001. ‘Normativity and Epistemic Intuitions.’ Philosophical Topics, 29: 429–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williamson, T. 2007. The Philosophy of Philosophy. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar