5 found
Sort by:
See also:
Profile: Kelly McCormick (Texas Christian University)
  1. Kelly McCormick (forthcoming). Companions in Innocence: Defending a New Methodological Assumption for Theorizing About Moral Responsibility. Philosophical Studies:1-19.
    The contemporary philosophical debate on free will and moral responsibility is rife with appeal to a variety of allegedly intuitive cases and principles. As a result, some have argued that many strands of this debate end in “dialectical stalemates,” boiling down to bedrock, seemingly intractable disagreements about intuition (Fischer, The metaphysics of free will: An essay on control. Blackwell, Cambridge, 1994). Here I attempt to carve out a middle ground between conventional reliance on appeal to intuition and intuitional skepticism in (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Kelly McCormick (forthcoming). Holding Responsibility Hostage: Responsibility, Justification, and the Compatibility Question. Journal of Value Inquiry:1-19.
    Traditional work on moral responsibility has for quite some time focused on the compatibility question: is moral responsibility compatible with determinism (or indeterminism)? But there is a second question that has also played a central role, though perhaps less explicitly. Call this second question the justificatory question:Can our reactive attitudes, judgments about moral responsibility, and the attendant practice of moral praising and blaming be rationally maintained and justified?It is not uncommon to take providing an answer to the compatibility question to (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Kelly McCormick (2013). Anchoring a Revisionist Account of Moral Responsibility. Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy 7 (3).
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Lera Boroditsky, Orly Fuhrman & Kelly McCormick (2011). Do English and Mandarin Speakers Think About Time Differently? Cognition 118 (1):123-129.
    Time is a fundamental domain of experience. In this paper we ask whether aspects of language and culture affect how people think about this domain. Specifically, we consider whether English and Mandarin speakers think about time differently. We review all of the available evidence both for and against this hypothesis, and report new data that further support and refine it. The results demonstrate that English and Mandarin speakers do think about time differently. As predicted by patterns in language, Mandarin speakers (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Orly Fuhrman, Kelly McCormick, Eva Chen, Heidi Jiang, Dingfang Shu, Shuaimei Mao & Lera Boroditsky (2011). How Linguistic and Cultural Forces Shape Conceptions of Time: English and Mandarin Time in 3D. Cognitive Science 35 (7):1305-1328.
    In this paper we examine how English and Mandarin speakers think about time, and we test how the patterns of thinking in the two groups relate to patterns in linguistic and cultural experience. In Mandarin, vertical spatial metaphors are used more frequently to talk about time than they are in English; English relies primarily on horizontal terms. We present results from two tasks comparing English and Mandarin speakers’ temporal reasoning. The tasks measure how people spatialize time in three-dimensional space, including (...)
    Direct download (10 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation