David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophical Studies 165 (2):315-334 (2013)
One mainstream approach to philosophy involves trying to learn about philosophically interesting, non-mental phenomena—ethical properties, for example, or causation—by gathering data from human beings. I call this approach “wide tent traditionalism.” It is associated with the use of philosophers’ intuitions as data, the making of deductive arguments from this data, and the gathering of intuitions by eliciting reactions to often quite bizarre thought experiments. These methods have been criticized—I consider experimental philosophy’s call for a move away from the use of philosophers’ intuitions as evidence, and recent suggestions about the use of inductive arguments in philosophy—and these criticisms point out important areas for improvement. However, embracing these reforms in turn gives wide-tent traditionalists strong reasons to maintain other traditional approaches to philosophy. Specifically, traditionalists’ commitment to using intuitions and to gathering them with bizarre thought experiments is well founded, both philosophically and empirically. I end by considering some problems with gathering trustworthy intuitions, and give suggestions about how best to solve them
|Keywords||Intuitions Methodology Experimental philosophy Thought experiments|
|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
Timothy Williamson (2007). The Philosophy of Philosophy. Blackwell Pub..
Derek Parfit (1984). Reasons and Persons. Oxford University Press.
Gregory L. Murphy (2004). The Big Book of Concepts. The MIT Press.
Michael R. DePaul & William Ramsey (eds.) (1998). Rethinking Intuition: The Psychology of Intuition and its Role in Philosophical Inquiry. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Laurence BonJour (1998). In Defense of Pure Reason. Cambridge University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Moti Mizrahi (2013). Why the Argument From Zombies Against Physicalism is Question-Begging. The Reasoner 7 (8):94-95.
Elke Brendel (2004). Intuition Pumps and the Proper Use of Thought Experiments. Dialectica 58 (1):89–108.
Jon Dorbolo (2006). Intuition Pumps. Minds and Machines 16 (1):81-86.
James McBain (2005). Moral Theorizing and Intuition Pumps; Or, Should We Worry About People’s Everyday Intuitions About Ethical Issues? The Midwest Quarterly 46 (3):268-283.
Elijah Chudnoff (2014). Intuition in Mathematics. In Barbara Held & Lisa Osbeck (eds.), Rational Intuition. Cambridge University Press
Anthony G. Rud (1994). Intuition and the Socratic Method: Two Opposed Ways of Knowing? Studies in Philosophy and Education 13 (1):65-75.
John Symons (2008). Intuition and Philosophical Methodology. Axiomathes 18 (1):67-89.
Moti Mizrahi (2012). Intuition Mongering. The Reasoner 6 (11):169-170.
Daniel Z. Korman (2005). Law Necessitarianism and the Importance of Being Intuitive. Philosophical Quarterly 55 (221):649–657.
Rick Dale, Daniel C. Richardson & Michael J. Owren (2003). Pumping for Gestural Origins: The Well May Be Rather Dry. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (2):218-219.
Moti Mizrahi (2013). More Intuition Mongering. The Reasoner 7 (1):5-6.
Yanming An (1997). Liang Shuming and Henri Bergson on Intuition: Cultural Context and the Evolution of Terms. Philosophy East and West 47 (3):337-362.
Fernand Gobet & Philippe Chassy (2009). Expertise and Intuition: A Tale of Three Theories. [REVIEW] Minds and Machines 19 (2):151-180.
Added to index2012-05-14
Total downloads75 ( #45,186 of 1,726,580 )
Recent downloads (6 months)7 ( #99,332 of 1,726,580 )
How can I increase my downloads?