David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Essays in Philosophy 13 (1):336-353 (2012)
Some recent researches in experimental philosophy have posed a problem for philosophers’ appeal to intuition (hereinafter referred to as PAI); the aim of this paper is to offer an answer to this challenge. The thesis against PAI implies that, given some experimental results, intuition does not seem to be a reliable epistemic source, and —more importantly— given the actual state of knowledge about its operation, we do not have sufficient resources to mitigate its errors and thus establish its reliability. That is why PAI is hopeless. Throughout this paper I will defend my own conception of PAI, which I have called the Deliberative Conception, and consequently, I will defend intersubjective agreement as a means to mitigate PAI errors, offering empirical evidence from recent studies on the Argumentative Theory of Reason that favor the conception I defend here. Finally, I will reply to some objections that might arise against the Deliberative Conception, which will lead me to discuss some metaphilosophical issues that are significantly relevant for the future of the dispute about the appeal to intuition.
|Keywords||Intuition Experimental Philosophy Truth Deliberation Logic Epistemology|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Moti Mizrahi (2012). Intuition Mongering. The Reasoner 6 (11):169-170.
Max Seeger (2010). Experimental Philosophy and the Twin Earth Intuition. Grazer Philosophische Studien 80:237-244.
Steven D. Hales (2012). The Faculty of Intuition. Analytic Philosophy 53 (2):180-207.
John Symons (2008). Intuition and Philosophical Methodology. Axiomathes 18 (1):67-89.
Paul Sludds (2003). The Importance of Being Actual: Some Reasons for and Against Procreation. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 81 (4):561 – 568.
Ernest Sosa (1996). Rational Intuition: Bealer on its Nature and Epistemic Status. Philosophical Studies 81 (2-3):151--162.
Moti Mizrahi (2013). More Intuition Mongering. The Reasoner 7 (1):5-6.
Renia Gasparatou (2010). Experimental Appeals to Intuition. Critica 42 (124):31-50.
Kevin Tobia, Wesley Buckwalter & Stephen Stich (2013). Moral Intuitions: Are Philosophers Experts? Philosophical Psychology 26 (5):629-638.
Stefano Caputo (2013). The Dependence of Truth on Being: Is There a Problem for Minimalism? In Miguel Hoeltje, Benjamin Schnieder & Alex Steinberg (eds.), Ontological Dependence, Supervenience, and Response-Dependence. Basic Philosophical Concepts Series,. Philosophia Verlag. 297-324.
Jonathan Ichikawa (2014). Who Needs Intuitions? Two Experimentalist Critiques. In Anthony Robert Booth & Darrell P. Rowbottom (eds.), Intuitions. Oxford University Press. 232-256.
Alison Gopnik & Eric Schwitzgebel (1998). Whose Concepts Are They, Anyway? The Role of Philosophical Intuition in Empirical Psychology. In M. R. DePaul & William Ramsey (eds.), Rethinking Intuition. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield. 75--91.
Thomas W. Smythe & Thomas G. Evans (2007). Intuition as a Basic Source of Moral Knowledge. Philosophia 35 (2):233-247.
Stephen Stich (2013). Do Different Groups Have Different Epistemic Intuitions? A Reply to Jennifer Nagel1. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 87 (1):151-178.
Added to index2012-03-09
Total downloads101 ( #17,062 of 1,696,464 )
Recent downloads (6 months)14 ( #39,542 of 1,696,464 )
How can I increase my downloads?