Part Two The Interviews
In Describing Inner Experience? Proponent Meets Skeptic. MIT Press (2007)
| Abstract | This chapter and the next five chapters – one for each sampling day – present annotated transcripts of our interviews with Melanie. We remind the reader of the context of the interviews. This was understood to be a private, personal exercise between Russ and <span class='Hi'>Eric</span> – the result of Russ saying to <span class='Hi'>Eric</span>, let’s you and I, who have publicly opposed positions, perform some sampling together and see what happens. Russ has long sampling experience, but perhaps he’s been “captured” by his own history; opening the process to a skeptical outsider might expose aspects of the procedure that he has overlooked. <span class='Hi'>Eric</span>, on the other hand, has a public role as a skeptic, but perhaps he has overstated that skepticism; confronting the concrete reality of another’s inner experience might alter his perspective. <span class='Hi'>Eric</span> can be said to be at a triple disadvantage in this situation: First, he’s “playing in Russ’s court” for the first time, while Russ has been performing interviews for decades. Second, the sampling interviews took place with Russ and Melanie together in Russ’ office and <span class='Hi'>Eric</span> participating by speakerphone from his office hundreds of miles away. Third, it was Russ who recruited Melanie, and therefore he had a (small) prior relationship with her. Apart from informing Melanie of the anticipated presence of a philosopher interested in exploring the method, the setup was standard DES procedure (for details, see Hurlburt and Heavey, 2006, and Hurlburt, 1990. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | No categories specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,865 |
| External links |
  Try with proxy. |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesH. E. Baber (1987). How Bad Is Rape? Hypatia 2 (2):125 - 138.
Eric Schwitzgebel (2007). Describing Inner Experience? Conclusion. In Describing Inner Experience? Proponent Meets Skeptic.
J. L. Schellenberg (2005). The Hiddenness Argument Revisited (II). Religious Studies 41 (3):287 - 303.
P. X. Monaghan (2010). A Novel Interpretation of Plato's Theory of Forms. Metaphysica 11 (1):63-78.
H. M. Malm (1989). Commodification or Compensation: A Reply to Ketchum. Hypatia 4 (3):128 - 135.
Peter J. Taylor (1994). Shifting Frames: From Divided to Distributed Psychologies of Scientific Agents. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1994:304 - 310.
Katalin Bimbó (2007). $LE^{T}{Rightarrow}$ , $LR^{Circ}{Wedgesim}$ , LK and Cutfree Proofs. Journal of Philosophical Logic 36 (5):557 - 570.
Dale Hample, Bing Han & David Payne (2010). The Aggressiveness of Playful Arguments. Argumentation 24 (4):405-421.
Tang Yijie & Yan Xin (2008). The Contemporary Significance of Confucianism. Frontiers of Philosophy in China 3 (4):477 - 501.
Robert Batterman (1992). Quantum Chaos and Semiclassical Mechanics. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1992:50 - 65.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2010-12-22Total downloads2 ( #234,650 of 556,803 )Recent downloads (6 months)0How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
