A surfeit of naturalism

2Citations
Citations of this article
8Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Philosophers have nothing to lose, and much to gain, by paying close attention to developments in the natural sciences. This insight amounts to a case for a tempered, eclectic naturalism. But the case for naturalism is often overstated. We should not overestimate the heuristic benefits of close attention to scientists' claims, nor should we give up on traditional "armchair" philosophical methods. We should not draw solely on the natural sciences (at the expense of the humanities) when seeking to enrich and discipline our philosophical theorising. Finally, philosophers should not shy away from criticising some scientists' claims, at the same time as they learn from others. © 2012 Metaphilosophy LLC and Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Lewens, T. (2012). A surfeit of naturalism. In Metaphilosophy (Vol. 43, pp. 46–57). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9973.2012.01727.x

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free