Boram Lee University of Connecticut
blank

My philosophical views

The answers shown here are not necessarily the same provided as part of the 2009 PhilPapers Survey. These answers can be updated at any time.

See also:

QuestionAnswerComments
A priori knowledge: yes or no?Accept: noA priori knowledge of the external world: no.
Abstract objects: Platonism or nominalism?Accept another alternativeHaven't thought deeply about the issue, but I think it ought to be decided on a case by case basis, according to the kind of abstract object. E.g., numbers might be reducible to sets, but sets might exist for Quinean reasons.
Aesthetic value: objective or subjective?Lean toward: subjective
Analytic-synthetic distinction: yes or no?Lean toward: yes
Epistemic justification: internalism or externalism?Lean toward: externalism
External world: idealism, skepticism, or non-skeptical realism?Reject one, undecided between othersFideistic realism: I cannot help being caused to believe that there is an external world, though I don't think there are good reasons for believing there is, i.e., good reasons for ruling out the Cartesian demon and suchlike.
Free will: compatibilism, libertarianism, or no free will?Lean toward: compatibilism
God: theism or atheism?Lean toward: atheism
Knowledge: empiricism or rationalism?Lean toward: empiricism
Knowledge claims: contextualism, relativism, or invariantism?Insufficiently familiar with the issue
Laws of nature: Humean or non-Humean?Lean toward: non-Humean
Logic: classical or non-classical?Lean toward: non-classical
Mental content: internalism or externalism?Accept both
Meta-ethics: moral realism or moral anti-realism?Accept: moral anti-realism
Metaphilosophy: naturalism or non-naturalism?Accept: naturalismNon-reductive naturalism.
Mind: physicalism or non-physicalism?Accept: physicalismIn favor of non-reductive physicalism.
Moral judgment: cognitivism or non-cognitivism?Accept: non-cognitivism
Moral motivation: internalism or externalism?Accept an intermediate view
Newcomb's problem: one box or two boxes?Insufficiently familiar with the issue
Normative ethics: deontology, consequentialism, or virtue ethics?Accept more than one
Perceptual experience: disjunctivism, qualia theory, representationalism, or sense-datum theory?Agnostic/undecided
Personal identity: biological view, psychological view, or further-fact view?Lean toward: psychological view
Politics: communitarianism, egalitarianism, or libertarianism?Lean toward: egalitarianismMy political stance actually combines elements of all three... most importantly, though, I believe principles of justice must incorporate something like Rawls's difference principle.
Proper names: Fregean or Millian?Agnostic/undecided
Science: scientific realism or scientific anti-realism?Accept: scientific realism
Teletransporter (new matter): survival or death?Lean toward: deathI believe psychological continuity is what matters in survival. But: the psychological continuity "preserved" by teleportation seems too tenuous and far removed from its normal biological cause (continuity of the brain), to warrant some skepticism as to the claim that psychological continuity is preserved.
Time: A-theory or B-theory?Insufficiently familiar with the issue
Trolley problem (five straight ahead, one on side track, turn requires switching, what ought one do?): switch or don't switch?Lean toward: switchI lean towards switching because I reject the squeamishness about getting one's hands dirty. That said, I don't believe there is an absolutely correct answer to this problem--it's a tragic choice, and one where deontological and consequentialist demands come into conflict.
Truth: correspondence, deflationary, or epistemic?Accept an intermediate viewMust be decided on a case by case basis, depending on the domain of discourse. Something like Michael Lynch's pluralistic functionalist view seems plausible.
Zombies: inconceivable, conceivable but not metaphysically possible, or metaphysically possible?Insufficiently familiar with the issue