Metaphilosophical Criteria for Worldview Comparison

Metaphilosophy 43 (3):306-347 (2012)
Abstract
Philosophy lacks criteria to evaluate its philosophical theories. To fill this gap, this essay introduces nine criteria to compare worldviews, classified in three broad categories: objective criteria (objective consistency, scientificity, scope), subjective criteria (subjective consistency, personal utility, emotionality), and intersubjective criteria (intersubjective consistency, collective utility, narrativity). The essay first defines what a worldview is and exposes the heuristic used in the quest for criteria. After describing each criterion individually, it shows what happens when each of them is violated. From the criteria, it derives assessment tests to compare and improve different worldviews. These include the is-ought, ought-act, and is-act first-order tests; the critical and dialectical second-order tests; the mixed-questions and first-second-order third-order tests; and the we-I, we-it, and it-I tests. The essay then applies these criteria and tests to a concrete example, comparing the Flying Spaghetti Monster deity with Intelligent Design. For another application, it draws more general fruitful suggestions for the dialogue between science and religion
Keywords philosophical method  philosophical criteria  Flying Spaghetti Monster  definition of philosophy  dialogue between science and religion  Intelligent Design  mission of philosophy  evaluation standards in philosophy  cognitive axiology  worldview comparison  worldview assessment  cognitive values  comprehensive worldview  task of philosophy  coherent worldview  scope of philosophy
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 10,999
External links
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
C. D. Broad (1958). Philosophy (I). Inquiry 1 (1-4):99 – 129.

View all 36 references

Citations of this work BETA
Similar books and articles
Hannes Leitgeb (2013). Criteria of Identity: Strong and Wrong. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 64 (1):61-68.
Mark Addis (1995). Criteria. Journal of Philosophical Research 20:139-174.
Alan Sidelle (1995). A Semantic Account of Rigidity. Philosophical Studies 80 (1):69 - 105.
David Davies (1998). McAllister's Aesthetics in Science: A Critical Notice. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 12 (1):25 – 32.
Analytics

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2012-04-12

Total downloads

17 ( #97,187 of 1,101,105 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

5 ( #58,910 of 1,101,105 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Start a new thread
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.