36 found
Order:
See also:
Profile: Michael DePaul (University of Notre Dame)
  1. Michael DePaul & William Ramsey (eds.) (1998). Rethinking Intuition: The Psychology of Intuition and its Role in Philosophical Inquiry. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.score: 1.2654
    Ancients and moderns alike have constructed arguments and assessed theories on the basis of common sense and intuitive judgments. Yet, despite the important role intuitions play in philosophy, there has been little reflection on fundamental questions concerning the sort of data intuitions provide, how they are supposed to lead us to the truth, and why we should treat them as important. In addition, recent psychological research seems to pose serious challenges to traditional intuition-driven philosophical inquiry. Rethinking Intuition brings together a (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   78 citations  
  2. George Bealer, Robert Cummings, Michael DePaul, Richard Foley, Alvin Goldman, Alison Gopnik, George Graham, Gary Gutting, Tery Horgan, Tamara Horowitz, Hilary Kornblith, Joel Pust, E. Rosch, Eldar Shafir, Stephen Stitch, Ernest Sosa & Edward Wisniewkski (1998). Rethinking Intuition: The Psychology of Intuition and its Role in Philosophical Inquiry. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.score: 1.18482
    Ancients and moderns alike have constructed arguments and assessed theories on the basis of common sense and intuitive judgments. Yet, despite the important role intuitions play in philosophy, there has been little reflection on fundamental questions concerning the sort of data intuitions provide, how they are supposed to lead us to the truth, and why we should treat them as important. In addition, recent psychological research seems to pose serious challenges to traditional intuition-driven philosophical inquiry. Rethinking Intuition brings together a (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   40 citations  
  3. Michael R. DePaul & Linda Zagzebski (eds.) (2003). Intellectual Virtue: Perspectives From Ethics and Epistemology. Oxford University Press.score: 1.16008
    The idea of a virtue has traditionally been important in ethics, but only recently has gained attention as an idea that can explain how we ought to form beliefs as well as how we ought to act. Moral philosophers and epistemologists have different approaches to the idea of intellectual virtue; here, Michael DePaul and Linda Zagzebski bring work from both fields together for the first time to address all of the important issues. It will be required reading for anyone working (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   20 citations  
  4. Michael R. DePaul & William Ramsey (eds.) (1998). Rethinking Intuition: The Psychology of Intuition and Its Role in Philosophical Inquiry. Rowman & Littlefield.score: 1.13393
    Students and scholars in both fields will find this book to be of great value.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   16 citations  
  5.  54
    Michael R. DePaul (1993). Balance and Refinement: Beyond Coherence Methods of Moral Inquiry. Routledge.score: 1.12458
    We all have moral beliefs. What if we are unsure about what to believe about a serious moral issue, or if one belief conflicts with another that we hold with equal conviction? When such conflicts and doubts occur, we try to make our beliefs cohere, and are forced to engage in a moral inquiry. Michael R. DePaul argues that we have to make our beliefs cohere, but that the current coherence methods are seriously flawed. Methods such as that which (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   15 citations  
  6.  49
    Michael R. Depaul & Stephen R. Grimm (2007). Review Essay on Jonathan Kvanvig's the Value of Knowledge and the Pursuit of Understanding. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 74 (2):498–514.score: 1.12057
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   7 citations  
  7. Michael DePaul (2006). Intuitions in Moral Inquiry. In David Copp (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ethical Theory. Oxford University Press 595--623.score: 1.10798
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  8.  36
    Michael R. Depaul (1988). The Problem of the Criterion and Coherence Methods in Ethics. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 18 (1):67 - 86.score: 1.10588
    One merit claimed for john rawls's coherence method, Wide reflective equilibrium, Is that it transcends the traditional two tiered approach to moral inquiry according to which one must choose as one's starting points either particular moral judgments or general moral principles. The two tiered conception of philosophical method is not limited to ethics. The most detailed exposition of the conception can be found in r m chisholm's various discussions of the problem of the criterion. While chisholm's work has played a (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  9.  70
    Michael Depaul (2009). Phenomenal Conservatism and Self-Defeat. [REVIEW] Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 78 (1):205-212.score: 1.10587
    No categories
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  10.  31
    Michael R. Depaul (1987). Supervenience and Moral Dependence. Philosophical Studies 51 (3):425 - 439.score: 1.10577
    One aim philosophers have in constructing moral theories is to identify the natural or non-Moral characteristics that make actions right or obligatory, Things good, Or persons virtuous. Yet we have no clear understanding of what it is for certain of a thing's non-Moral properties to be responsible for its moral properties. Given the recent interest in the concept of supervenience one might think that the dependence of moral on natural properties could be explained in terms of it. Unfortunately, None of (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  11.  65
    Michael R. Depaul (1988). Argument and Perception: The Role of Literature in Moral Inquiry. Journal of Philosophy 85 (10):552-565.score: 1.10459
  12.  8
    Linda Zagzebski & Michael Depaul (2004). Intellectual Virtue. Mind 113 (452):791-794.score: 1.10417
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  13.  19
    Michael DePaul (2000). Character Traits, Virtues, and Vices. The Proceedings of the Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy 9:141-157.score: 1.10408
    Recently, Gilbert Harman has used empirical results obtained by social psychologists to argue that there are no character traits of the type presupposed by virtue ethics—no honesty or dishonesty, no courage or cowardice, in short, no virtue or vice. In this paper, I critically assess his argument as well as that of the social psychologists he appeals to. I suggest that the experimental results recounted by Harman would not much concern such classical virtue theorists as Plato—particularly the Plato of the (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  14.  33
    Michael R. DePaul (1986). Reflective Equilibrium and Foundationalism. American Philosophical Quarterly 23 (1):59 - 69.score: 1.10397
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  15.  17
    Michael R. Depaul & Stephen R. Grimm (2007). The Value of Knowledge and the Pursuit of Understanding by Jonathan Kvanvig. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 74 (2):498-514.score: 1.10376
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  16.  19
    Michael R. DePaul (2000). Linguistics is Not a Good Model for Philosophy. Southern Journal of Philosophy 38 (S1):113-120.score: 1.10373
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  17.  50
    Michael R. DePaul (1987). Two Conceptions of Coherence Methods in Ethics. Mind 96 (384):463-481.score: 1.10326
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  18.  64
    Michael R. Depaul (1988). Naivete and Corruption in Moral Inquiry. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 48 (4):619-635.score: 1.10315
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  19.  66
    Michael DePaul (2009). Pyrrhonian Moral Skepticism and the Problem of the Criterion. Philosophical Issues 19 (1):38-56.score: 1.10239
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  20.  9
    Michael DePaul (2013). Agent Centeredness, Agent Neutrality, Disagreement, and Truth Conduciveness. In Chris Tucker (ed.), Seemings and Justification: New Essays on Dogmatism and Phenomenal Conservatism. OUP Usa 202.score: 1.10213
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  21.  13
    Michael R. DePaul (1991). The Highest Moral Knowledge and the Truth Behind Internalism. Southern Journal of Philosophy 29 (S1):137-160.score: 1.10163
  22.  23
    Michael R. Depaul (1993). Brink's Moral Realism and the Foundations of Ethics. [REVIEW] Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 53 (3):731-735.score: 1.1016
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  23.  48
    Michael R. DePaul (2004). Truth Consequentialism, Withholding and Proportioning Belief to the Evidence. Philosophical Issues 14 (1):91–112.score: 1.10156
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  24.  27
    Michael DePaul (2011). Sosa, Certainty and the Problem of the Criterion. Philosophical Papers 40 (3):287-304.score: 1.10153
    Abstract In Reflective Knowledge, Ernest Sosa continues his detailed and intriguing defense of his two level account of knowledge that recognizes both animal and reflective knowledge. The latter more impressive type of knowledge requires a coherent positive epistemic perspective defending the reliability of a source of belief. Viewing Sosa's discussion from the through the lens provided by R.M. Chisholm's treatments of the problem of the criterion, I worry that Sosa's approach is too far in the methodist direction. As a result, (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  25.  37
    Michael R. DePaul (1998). Liberal Exclusions and Foundationalism. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 1 (1):103-120.score: 1.10122
    Certain versions of liberalism exclude from public political discussions the reasons some citizens regard as most fundamental, reasons having to do with their deepest religious, philosophical, moral or political views. This liberal exclusion of deep and deeply held reasons from political discussions has been controversial. In this article I will point out a way in which the discussion seems to presuppose a foundationalist conception of human reasoning. This is rather surprising, inasmuch as one of the foremost advocates of liberalism, John (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  26.  15
    Michael DePaul (2009). Do Heuristics Provide a Good Model for Moral Intuition or Moral Perception? Modern Schoolman 86 (3-4):349-362.score: 1.10122
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  27.  28
    Michael R. DePaul (2002). A Half Dozen Puzzles Regarding Intrinsic Attitudinal Hedonism. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 65 (3):629-635.score: 1.10091
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  28.  4
    Michael R. Depaul (1990). Critical Notice. Mind 99 (396):619 - 633.score: 1.10075
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  29.  4
    Michael R. Depaul (1993). Moral Realism and the Foundations of Ethics. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 53 (3):731-735.score: 1.10063
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  30.  11
    Michael R. DePaul (1981). The Rationality of Belief in God. Religious Studies 17 (3):343 - 356.score: 1.10058
    The major purpose of Hans Kung's SOO-page book entitled Does God Exist? is to show that belief in the Christian God is rationally justifiable. Given the title, purpose and size of the book, I was surprised by many of the things the book does not contain. It gives little attention and offers no solution to the problem of evil; it deals briefly with the traditional proofs for God, devoting at most one page each to the cosmological, teleological, ontological and moral (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  31.  8
    Michael R. DePaul (2002). Critical Study: Goldman, Alvin I.Knowledge in a Social World. Noûs 36 (2):335–350.score: 1.10028
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  32.  7
    Michael R. DePaul (1988). Moral Statuses. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 66 (4):517 – 532.score: 1.10027
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  33. Michael DePaul (1995). Coherentism. In Audi Robert (ed.), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy. Cambridge University Pressscore: 1.1
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  34. Michael DePaul (ed.) (2000). Resurrecting Old-Fashioned Foundationalism. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.score: 1.1
    The contributions in this volume make an important effort to resurrect a rather old fashioned form of foundationalism. They defend the position that there are some beliefs that are justified, and are not themselves justified by any further beliefs. This epistemic foundationalism has been the subject of rigorous attack by a wide range of theorists in recent years, leading to the impression that foundationalism is a thing of the past. DePaul argues that it is precisely the volume and virulence of (...)
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  35.  0
    Michael R. Depaul (1981). The Rationality of Belief in God: MICHAEL R. DEPAUL. Religious Studies 17 (3):343-356.score: 1.1
    In the introduction to his account of the debate concerning religion between Cleanthes, Philo and Demea, Pamphilus remarks that ‘reasonable men may be allowed to differ where no one can reasonably be positive’. Pamphilus goes on to suggest that natural theology is an area that abounds with issues about which ‘no one can reasonably be positive’. Assuming that the beliefs of reasonable men are themselves reasonable, Pamphilus can be interpreted as holding that If no one is reasonably positive that the (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  36. Michael R. DePaul (2009). Ugly Analyses and Value. In Adrian Haddock, Alan Millar & Duncan Pritchard (eds.), Epistemic Value. OUP Oxfordscore: 1.1
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography