Jim Kelly Miami University, Ohio
Contact
  • No contact info.

Affiliations
  • Faculty, Miami University, Ohio
  • PhD, Ohio State University, 1983.

Areas of specialization

Areas of interest

My philosophical views


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: yesWhen discussed in terms of presuppositions that cannot be consistently denied
Abstract objects: Platonism or nominalism?The question is too unclear to answer
Aesthetic value: objective or subjective?Accept: objective
Analytic-synthetic distinction: yes or no?The question is too unclear to answer
Epistemic justification: internalism or externalism?Accept: externalism
External world: idealism, skepticism, or non-skeptical realism?Accept: non-skeptical realism
Free will: compatibilism, libertarianism, or no free will?The question is too unclear to answer
God: theism or atheism?The question is too unclear to answerI understand atheism as the view that there is no meaning or purpose to life. Life does have meaning and purpose. I do not accept the view that there is a supreme BEING.
Knowledge: empiricism or rationalism?Accept: empiricismBut an empiricism not limited to the five senses.
Knowledge claims: contextualism, relativism, or invariantism?The question is too unclear to answerI deny relativism.
Laws of nature: Humean or non-Humean?Lean toward: non-Humean
Logic: classical or non-classical?Lean toward: classical
Mental content: internalism or externalism?Lean toward: externalism
Meta-ethics: moral realism or moral anti-realism?Accept: moral realism
Metaphilosophy: naturalism or non-naturalism?Lean toward: non-naturalismAs long as this does not involve dualism. It is a categorial issue.
Mind: physicalism or non-physicalism?Accept: non-physicalismDo not accept scientific naturalism or dualism.
Moral judgment: cognitivism or non-cognitivism?Accept: cognitivismBut I accept that our emotive powers are cognitive.
Moral motivation: internalism or externalism?The question is too unclear to answerWhen one desires X, one takes it that X ought to be/or be done. One can be mistaken about this.
Newcomb's problem: one box or two boxes?Insufficiently familiar with the issue
Normative ethics: deontology, consequentialism, or virtue ethics?The question is too unclear to answerCategories are too simplistic.
Perceptual experience: disjunctivism, qualia theory, representationalism, or sense-datum theory?The question is too unclear to answerDeny qualia as nonphysical things, but see semantic intentionality as the real issue.
Personal identity: biological view, psychological view, or further-fact view?The question is too unclear to answer
Politics: communitarianism, egalitarianism, or libertarianism?Accept: egalitarianismIf this refers to equal opportunities.
Proper names: Fregean or Millian?The question is too unclear to answer
Science: scientific realism or scientific anti-realism?Lean toward: scientific realismI take it there are empirical facts that scientific investigation can access. I also take it that there are moral truths (context dependent)that scientific investigation cannot access. But there is a value structure to reality that we can access.
Teletransporter (new matter): survival or death?The question is too unclear to answer
Time: A-theory or B-theory?The question is too unclear to answer
Trolley problem (five straight ahead, one on side track, turn requires switching, what ought one do?): switch or don't switch?Insufficiently familiar with the issue
Truth: correspondence, deflationary, or epistemic?Accept: correspondenceaccept that there a value dimension to reality
Zombies: inconceivable, conceivable but not metaphysically possible, or metaphysically possible?The question is too unclear to answerWhat is imaginable is not always thinkable.