David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
In Matthew Haug (ed.), Philosophical Methodology: The Armchair or the Laboratory? Routledge. 145-165 (2013)
In what does philosophical progress consist? 'Vertical' progress corresponds to development within a specific paradigm/framework for theorizing (of the sort associated, revolutions aside, with science); 'horizontal' progress corresponds to the identification and cultivation of diverse paradigms (of the sort associated, conservativism aside, with art and pure mathematics). Philosophical progress seems to involve both horizontal and vertical dimensions, in a way that is somewhat puzzling: philosophers work in a number of competing frameworks (like artists or mathematicians), while typically maintaining that only one of these is correct (like scientists). I diagnose this situation as reflecting that we are presently quite far from the end of inquiry into philosophical methodology. The good news is that we appear to be making advances on this score. The bad news is that failure to recognize or make explicit that our standards are in flux often leads to dogmatism, as I illustrate by attention to three assumptions presently operative in metaphysical and metametaphysical contexts. I close by identifying a tension between vertical and horizontal progress in philosophy, and suggesting an updated version of Carnap's principle of tolerance for new philosophical forms.
|Keywords||methodology metaphysics metametaphysics Carnap Quine epistemology metaontology quantification Hume's dictum necessary connections|
|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
Tuomas E. Tahko (2012). In Defence of Aristotelian Metaphysics. In , Contemporary Aristotelian Metaphysics. Cambridge University Press. 26-43.
Paul Gregory (2003). Putting the Bite Back Into. Principia 7 (1-2):115-129.
Marian David (1996). Analyticity, Carnap, Quine, and Truth. Philosophical Perspectives 10:281 - 296.
Paul A. Gregory (2003). Two Dogmas'–All Bark and No Bite? Carnap and Quine on Analyticity. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 67 (3):633–648.
Richard Creath (1991). Every Dogma has its Day. Erkenntnis 35 (1-3):347 - 389.
Jessica M. Wilson (2010). What is Hume's Dictum, and Why Believe It? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 80 (3):595 - 637.
Paul Gregory (2003). 'Two Dogmas'--All Bark and No Bite? Carnap and Quine on Analyticity. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 67 (3):633 - 648.
Matthew C. Haug (2011). On the Prospects for Ontology: Deflationism, Pluralism, and Carnap's Principle of Tolerance. European Journal of Philosophy 21 (2):593-616.
Paul A. Gregory (2003). 'Two Dogmas' -- All Bark and No Bite? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 67 (3):633-648.
David Manley (2009). Introduction : A Guided Tour of Metametaphysics. In David John Chalmers, David Manley & Ryan Wasserman (eds.), Metametaphysics: New Essays on the Foundations of Ontology. Oxford University Press.
Jessica M. Wilson (2015). Hume's Dictum and Metaphysical Modality: Lewis's Combinatorialism. In Barry Loewer & Jonathan Schaffer (eds.), The Blackwell Companion to David Lewis. Blackwell. 138-158.
Jessica M. Wilson (2010). From Constitutional Necessities to Causal Necessities. In Helen Beebee & Nigel Sabbarton-Leary (eds.), The Semantics and Metaphysics of Natural Kinds. Routledge.
Cory Juhl (2009). Analyticity. Routledge.
Stephan Blatti & Sandra Lapointe (eds.) (forthcoming). Ontology After Carnap. Oxford University Press.
Added to index2012-12-10
Total downloads115 ( #11,166 of 1,410,041 )
Recent downloads (6 months)37 ( #4,611 of 1,410,041 )
How can I increase my downloads?