Philo 11 (1):5-18 (2008)
|Abstract||This paper is a critical discussion of Quine’s naturalist credos: (1) physicalism; (2) there is no first philosophy; (3) philosophy is continuous with science; and (4) the only responsible theory of the world as a whole is scientific theory. The aim is to show that Quine’s formulations admit of two readings: a strong reading (often Quine’s own) which is compatible with reductive forms of naturalism but implausible; and a mild reading which is plausible but suggestive of more liberal forms of naturalism. The paper ends by claiming that naturalism is a normative doctrine that is inconsistent by its own lights|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||No categories specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
A. Rosenberg (1999). Naturalistic Epistemology for Eliminative Materialists. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 59 (2):335-358.
Robert Audi (2000). Philosophical Naturalism at the Turn of the Century. Journal of Philosophical Research 25:27-45.
Gregg Caruso (2007). Realism, Naturalism, and Pragmatism: A Closer Look at the Views of Quine and Devitt. Kriterion: Journal of Philosophy 21:64-83.
Dan McArthur (2008). Theory Change, Structural Realism, and the Relativised a Priori. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 22 (1):5 – 20.
Wybo Houkes (2002). Normativity in Quine's Naturalism: The Technology of Truth-Seeking? Journal for General Philosophy of Science 33 (2):251-267.
Mario De Caro & David Macarthur (eds.) (2004). Naturalism in Question. Harvard University Press.
Susan Haack (1993). The Two Faces of Quine's Naturalism. Synthese 94 (3):335 - 356.
Patrick Dieveney (2012). In Defense of Quinean Ontological Naturalism. Erkenntnis 76 (2):225-242.
David Macarthur (2008). Quinean Naturalism in Question. Philo 11 (1):5-18.
Added to index2010-03-04
Total downloads27 ( #45,781 of 549,087 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #25,722 of 549,087 )
How can I increase my downloads?