158 found
Order:
Disambiguations:
John Hawthorne [158]John Patrick Hawthorne [1]
  1. John Hawthorne (2004). Knowledge and Lotteries. Oxford University Press.
    Knowledge and Lotteries is organized around an epistemological puzzle: in many cases, we seem consistently inclined to deny that we know a certain class of propositions, while crediting ourselves with knowledge of propositions that imply them. In its starkest form, the puzzle is this: we do not think we know that a given lottery ticket will be a loser, yet we normally count ourselves as knowing all sorts of ordinary things that entail that its holder will not suddenly acquire (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   375 citations  
  2. John Hawthorne & Jason Stanley (2008). Knowledge and Action. Journal of Philosophy 105 (10):571-590.
    Judging by our folk appraisals, then, knowledge and action are intimately related. The theories of rational action with which we are familiar leave this unexplained. Moreover, discussions of knowledge are frequently silent about this connection. This is a shame, since if there is such a connection it would seem to constitute one of the most fundamental roles for knowledge. Our purpose in this paper is to rectify this lacuna, by exploring ways in which knowing something is related to rationally acting (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   116 citations  
  3. John Hawthorne & David Manley (2012). The Reference Book. Oxford University Press.
    This book critically examines some widespread views about the semantic phenomenon of reference and the cognitive phenomenon of singular thought. It begins with a defense of the view that neither is tied to a special relation of causal or epistemic acquaintance. It then challenges the alleged semantic rift between definite and indefinite descriptions on the one hand, and names and demonstratives on the other—a division that has been motivated in part by appeals to considerations of acquaintance. Drawing on recent work (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   25 citations  
  4. Theodore Sider, John Hawthorne & Dean W. Zimmerman (eds.) (2008). Contemporary Debates in Metaphysics. Blackwell Pub..
    This anthology introduces advanced undergraduates and beginning graduate students to today's debates in metaphysics. The book consists of essays by contemporary metaphysicians, and all but one appear here for the first time. For each of nine topics, there are two essays, one "pro-" and one "con-".
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   49 citations  
  5. Herman Cappelen & John Hawthorne (2009). Relativism and Monadic Truth. Oxford University Press.
    Relativism has dominated many intellectual circles, past and present, but the twentieth century saw it banished to the fringes of mainstream analytic philosophy. Of late, however, it is making something of a comeback within that loosely configured tradition, a comeback that attempts to capitalize on some important ideas in foundational semantics. Relativism and Monadic Truth aims not merely to combat analytic relativism but also to combat the foundational ideas in semantics that led to its revival. Doing so requires a proper (...)
    Direct download (10 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   73 citations  
  6. John Hawthorne (2005). Contemporary Debates in Epistemology. Malden, Ma: Blackwell.
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   52 citations  
  7. Cian Dorr & John Hawthorne (2013). Naturalness. In Karen Bennett & Dean Zimmerman (eds.), Oxford Studies in Metaphysics, vol. 8. Oxford University Press 1.
    Lewis's notion of a "natural" property has proved divisive: some have taken to the notion with enthusiasm, while others have been sceptical. However, it is far from obvious what the enthusiasts and the sceptics are disagreeing about. This paper attempts to articulate what is at stake in this debate.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  8. John Hawthorne (2004). Knowledge and Lotteries. Oxford University Press Uk.
    Knowledge and Lotteries is organized around an epistemological puzzle: in many cases, we seem consistently inclined to deny that we know a certain class of propositions, while crediting ourselves with knowledge of propositions that imply them. In its starkest form, the puzzle is this: we do not think we know that a given lottery ticket will be a loser, yet we normally count ourselves as knowing all sorts of ordinary things that entail that its holder will not suddenly acquire a (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   48 citations  
  9. John Hawthorne & David Manley (2005). Review of Stephen Mumford's Dispositions. [REVIEW] Noûs 39:179-95.
    In Mumford’s Dispositions, the reader will find an extended treatment of the recent debate about dispositions from Ryle and Geach to the present. Along the way, Mumford presents his own views on several key points, though we found the book much more thorough in its assessment of opposing views than in the development of a positive account. As we’ll try to make clear, some of the ideas endorsed in Dispositions are certainly worth pursuing; others are not. Following Mackie, Shoemaker, and (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  10. John Hawthorne (2006). Metaphysical Essays. Oxford University Press.
    John Hawthorne is widely regarded as one of the finest philosophers working today. He is perhaps best known for his contributions to metaphysics, and this volume collects his most notable papers in this field. Hawthorne offers original treatments of fundamental topics in philosophy, including identity, ontology, vagueness, and causation. Six of the essays appear here for the first time, and there is a valuable introduction to guide the reader through the selection.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   36 citations  
  11. Tamar Szabó Gendler & John Hawthorne (eds.) (2002). Conceivability and Possibility. Oxford University Press.
    The capacity to represent things to ourselves as possible plays a crucial role both in everyday thinking and in philosophical reasoning; this volume offers much-needed philosophical illumination of conceivability, possibility, and the relations between them.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   50 citations  
  12. Cian Dorr & John Hawthorne (2014). Semantic Plasticity and Speech Reports. Philosophical Review 123 (3):281-338.
    Most meanings we express belong to large families of variant meanings, among which it would be implausible to suppose that some are much more apt for being expressed than others. This abundance of candidate meanings creates pressure to think that the proposition attributing any particular meaning to an expression is modally plastic: its truth depends very sensitively on the exact microphysical state of the world. However, such plasticity seems to threaten ordinary counterfactuals whose consequents contain speech reports, since it is (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  13. Cian Dorr & John Hawthorne (2013). Embedding Epistemic Modals. Mind 122 (488):867-914.
    Seth Yalcin has pointed out some puzzling facts about the behaviour of epistemic modals in certain embedded contexts. For example, conditionals that begin ‘If it is raining and it might not be raining, … ’ sound unacceptable, unlike conditionals that begin ‘If it is raining and I don’t know it, … ’. These facts pose a prima facie problem for an orthodox treatment of epistemic modals as expressing propositions about the knowledge of some contextually specified individual or group. This paper (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   7 citations  
  14. Matthew A. Benton, John Hawthorne & Yoaav Isaacs (2016). Evil and Evidence. Oxford Studies in Philosophy of Religion 7:1-31.
    The problem of evil is the most prominent argument against the existence of God. Skeptical theists contend that it is not a good argument. Their reasons for this contention vary widely, involving such notions as CORNEA, epistemic appearances, 'gratuitous' evils, 'levering' evidence, and the representativeness of goods. We aim to dispel some confusions about these notions, in particular by clarifying their roles within a probabilistic epistemology. In addition, we develop new responses to the problem of evil from both the phenomenal (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  15. Cian Dorr, Jeremy Goodman & John Hawthorne (2014). Knowing Against the Odds. Philosophical Studies 170 (2):277-287.
    We present and discuss a counterexample to the following plausible principle: if you know that a coin is fair, and for all you know it is going to be flipped, then for all you know it will land tails.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  16. John Hawthorne (2002). Deeply Contingent a Priori Knowledge. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 65 (2):247-269.
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   31 citations  
  17. John Hawthorne (2005). Chance and Counterfactuals. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 70 (2):396–405.
    Suppose the world is chancy. The worry arises that most ordinary counterfactuals are false. This paper examines David Lewis' strategy for rescuing such counterfactuals, and argues that it is highly problematic.
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   22 citations  
  18. Frank Arntzenius, Adam Elga & John Hawthorne (2004). Bayesianism, Infinite Decisions, and Binding. Mind 113 (450):251 - 283.
    We pose and resolve several vexing decision theoretic puzzles. Some are variants of existing puzzles, such as 'Trumped' (Arntzenius and McCarthy 1997), 'Rouble trouble' (Arntzenius and Barrett 1999), 'The airtight Dutch book' (McGee 1999), and 'The two envelopes puzzle' (Broome 1995). Others are new. A unified resolution of the puzzles shows that Dutch book arguments have no force in infinite cases. It thereby provides evidence that reasonable utility functions may be unbounded and that reasonable credence functions need not be countably (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   13 citations  
  19.  82
    Tamar Gendler & John Hawthorne (eds.) (2006). Perceptual Experience. Oxford University Press.
    In the last few years there has been an explosion of philosophical interest in perception; after decades of neglect, it is now one of the most fertile areas for new work. Perceptual Experience presents new work by fifteen of the world's leading philosophers. All papers are written specially for this volume, and they cover a broad range of topics dealing with sensation and representation, consciousness and awareness, and the connections between perception and knowledge and between perception and action. (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   12 citations  
  20. Tamar Szabó Gendler & John Hawthorne (2005). The Real Guide to Fake Barns: A Catalogue of Gifts for Your Epistemic Enemies. Philosophical Studies 124 (3):331-352.
    Perhaps the concept of knowledge, prior to its being fashioned and molded by certain philosophical traditions, never offered any stable negative verdict in the original fake barn case.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   12 citations  
  21. John Hawthorne & Maria Lasonen-Aarnio (2009). Knowledge and Objective Chance. In Patrick Greenough & Duncan Pritchard (eds.), Williamson on Knowledge. Oxford University Press 92--108.
    We think we have lots of substantial knowledge about the future. But contemporary wisdom has it that indeterminism prevails in such a way that just about any proposition about the future has a non-zero objective chance of being false.2, 3 What should one do about this? One, pessimistic, reaction is scepticism about knowledge of the future. We think this should be something of a last resort, especially since this scepticism is likely to infect alleged knowledge of the present and past. (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   10 citations  
  22. John Hawthorne (2002). Causal Structuralism. In James Tomberlin (ed.), Metaphysics. Blackwell 361--78.
    No categories
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   15 citations  
  23. John Hawthorne (2012). Knowledge and Epistemic Necessity. Philosophical Studies 158 (3):493-501.
    Claims of the form 'I know P and it might be that not-P' tend to sound odd. One natural explanation of this oddity is that the conjuncts are semantically incompatible: in its core epistemic use, 'Might P' is true in a speaker's mouth only if the speaker does not know that not-P. In this paper I defend this view against an alternative proposal that has been advocated by Trent Dougherty and Patrick Rysiew and elaborated upon in Jeremy Fantl and Matthew (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  24. John Hawthorne & Theodore Sider (2002). Locations. Philosophical Topics 30 (1):53-76.
    Think of “locations” very abstractly, as positions in a space, any space. Temporal locations are positions in time; spatial locations are positions in (physical) space; particulars are locations in quality space. Should we reify locations? Are locations entities? Spatiotemporal relation- alists say there are no such things as spatiotemporal locations; the fundamental spatial and temporal facts involve no locations as objects, only the instantiation of spatial and temporal relations. The denial of locations in quality space is the bundle theory, according (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   15 citations  
  25.  7
    John Hawthorne & Scott Sturgeon (2006). Disjunctivism. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 80 (1):145-216.
    [John Hawthorne] We examine some well-known disjunctivist projects in the philosophy of perception, mainly in a critical vein. Our discussion is divided into four parts. Following some introductory remarks, we examine in part two the link between object-dependent contents and disjunctivism. In part three, we explore the disjunctivist's use of discriminability facts as a basis for understanding experience. In part four, we examine an interesting argument for disjunctivism that has been offered by Michael Martin. /// [Scott Sturgeon] The paper aims (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   13 citations  
  26.  34
    John Hawthorne (2015). Comments on Transient Truths: An Essay in the Metaphysics of Propositions. Inquiry 58 (6):619-626.
    This paper distinguishes two importantly different kinds of temporalism. According to one version, the truth value of propositions is parameterized to times. According to a second version, propositions have a truth value simpliciter, but some propositions that are true will be or were false. I point out that the second version is neglected in Berit Brogaard's Transient Truths, and explore whether there are good arguments against it implicit in that work. I also critically engage with various arguments presented by Brogaard (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  27. John Hawthorne & Karson Kovakovich (2006). Disjunctivism. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 80 (1):145-83.
    [John Hawthorne] We examine some well-known disjunctivist projects in the philosophy of perception, mainly in a critical vein. Our discussion is divided into four parts. Following some introductory remarks, we examine in part two the link between object-dependent contents and disjunctivism. In part three, we explore the disjunctivist's use of discriminability facts as a basis for understanding experience. In part four, we examine an interesting argument for disjunctivism that has been offered by Michael Martin. /// [Scott Sturgeon] The paper aims (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   10 citations  
  28. Andy Egan, John Hawthorne & Brian Weatherson (2005). Epistemic Modals in Context. In G. Preyer & G. Peter (eds.), Contextualism in Philosophy. Oxford University Press 131-170.
    A very simple contextualist treatment of a sentence containing an epistemic modal, e.g. a might be F, is that it is true iff for all the contextually salient community knows, a is F. It is widely agreed that the simple theory will not work in some cases, but the counterexamples produced so far seem amenable to a more complicated contextualist theory. We argue, however, that no contextualist theory can capture the evaluations speakers naturally make of sentences containing epistemic modals. If (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   10 citations  
  29. John Hawthorne & Amia Srinivasan (2013). Disagreement Without Transparency: Some Bleak Thoughts. In David Christensen & Jennifer Lackey (eds.), The Epistemology of Disagreement: New Essays. Oxford University Press 9--30.
    What ought one to do, epistemically speaking, when faced with a disagreement? Faced with this question, one naturally hopes for an answer that is principled, general, and intuitively satisfying. We want to argue that this is a vain hope. Our claim is that a satisfying answer will prove elusive because of non-transparency: that there is no condition such that we are always in a position to know whether it obtains. When we take seriously that there is nothing, including our own (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  30. Herman Cappelen & John Hawthorne (2011). Reply to Lasersohn, MacFarlane, and Richard. [REVIEW] Philosophical Studies 156 (3):417-419.
    Reply to Lasersohn, MacFarlane, and Richard.
    Direct download (17 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  31. John Hawthorne (2001). Intrinsic Properties and Natural Relations. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 63 (2):399-403.
  32.  78
    John Hawthorne & Ernest Lepore (2011). On Words. Journal of Philosophy 108 (9):447-485.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  33. John Hawthorne & Ofra Magidor (2009). Assertion, Context, and Epistemic Accessibility. Mind 118 (470):377-397.
    In his seminal paper 'Assertion', Robert Stalnaker distinguishes between the semantic content of a sentence on an occasion of use and the content asserted by an utterance of that sentence on that occasion. While in general the assertoric content of an utterance is simply its semantic content, the mechanisms of conversation sometimes force the two apart. Of special interest in this connection is one of the principles governing assertoric content in the framework, one according to which the asserted content ought (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  34. John Hawthorne (2005). Knowledge and Lotteries. Oxford University Press Uk.
    Knowledge and Lotteries is organized around an epistemological puzzle: in many cases, we seem consistently inclined to deny that we know certain propositions, while crediting ourselves with knowledge of propositions that imply them. In its starkest form, the puzzle is this: we do not think we know that a given lottery ticket will be a loser, yet we normally count ourselves as knowing all sorts of things which entail that its holder will not suddenly acquire a large fortune. After providing (...)
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   8 citations  
  35. John Hawthorne & Daniel Nolan (2006). What Would Teleological Causation Be? In Metaphysical Essays. Oxford University Press
    As is well known, Aristotelian natural philosophy, and many other systems of natural philosophy since, have relied heavily on teleology and teleological causation. Somehow, the purpose or end of an obj ect can be used to predict and explain what that object does: once you know that the end of an acorn is to become an oak, and a few things about what sorts of circumstances are conducive to the attainment of this end, you can predict a lot about the (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  36. John Hawthorne (2003). Identity. In Michael J. Loux & Dean W. Zimmerman (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Metaphysics. Oxford University Press 99--130.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   13 citations  
  37. John Hawthorne (2002). Advice for Physicalists. Philosophical Studies 109 (1):17-52.
    This paper engages with two compelling challenges to physicalism, each designed to show that the nature of experience is elusive from the standpoint of physical science. It is argued that the physicalist is ultimately well placed to meet both challenges.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   8 citations  
  38. John Hawthorne (2001). Freedom in Context. Philosophical Studies 104 (1):63-79.
    David Lewis has recently deployed a contextualist strategy for defending ordinary claims to know.1 In this paper, I wish to extend that strategy to ordinary claims about freedom.2 The result is a species of compatibilism that, while foreign to current debates, has a good deal going for it.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   12 citations  
  39. John Hawthorne (2007). Craziness and Metasemantics. Philosophical Review 116 (3):427-440.
  40. John Hawthorne & Tamar Szabó Gendler (2000). Origin Essentialism: The Arguments Reconsidered. Mind 109 (434):285-298.
    ln "Possibilities and the Arguments for Origin Essentialism" Teresa Robertson (1998) contends that the best-known arguments in favour of origin essentialism can succeed only at the cost of violating modal common sense—by denying that any variation in constitution or process of assembly is possible. Focusing on the (Kripke-style) arguments of Nathan Salmon and Graeme Forbes, Robertson shows that both founder in the face of sophisticated Ship of Theseus style considerations. While Robertson is right that neither of the arguments is compelling (...)
    Direct download (10 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   7 citations  
  41. Jeffrey Sanford Russell, John Hawthorne & Lara Buchak (2015). Groupthink. Philosophical Studies 172 (5):1287-1309.
    How should a group with different opinions (but the same values) make decisions? In a Bayesian setting, the natural question is how to aggregate credences: how to use a single credence function to naturally represent a collection of different credence functions. An extension of the standard Dutch-book arguments that apply to individual decision-makers recommends that group credences should be updated by conditionalization. This imposes a constraint on what aggregation rules can be like. Taking conditionalization as a basic constraint, we gather (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  42. John Hawthorne (2005). Knowledge and Evidence. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 70 (2):452–458.
    Most of us, tacitly or explicitly, embrace a more or less Cartesian conception of our epistemic condition. According to such a conception, "what we have to go on" in learning about the world is, on the one hand, that which is a priori accessible to us, and, on the other, the inner experiences - visual imagery, tactile sensations, recollective episodes and so on - that pop into our Carte- sian theaters. One of the central themes of Knowledge and its Limits (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   7 citations  
  43. John Hawthorne, Daniel Rothschild & Levi Spectre (2016). Belief is Weak. Philosophical Studies 173 (5):1393-1404.
    It is tempting to posit an intimate relationship between belief and assertion. The speech act of assertion seems like a way of transferring the speaker’s belief to his or her audience. If this is right, then you might think that the evidential warrant required for asserting a proposition is just the same as the warrant for believing it. We call this thesis entitlement equality. We argue here that entitlement equality is false, because our everyday notion of belief is unambiguously a (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  44.  68
    Billy Dunaway & John Hawthorne (forthcoming). Scepticism. In William J. Abraham Frederick D. Aquino (ed.), Oxford Handbook of the Epistemology of Theology. Oxford University Press
  45.  38
    Tamar Szabo Gendler & John Hawthorne (eds.) (2005). Oxford Studies in Epistemology. Oxford University Press.
    Oxford Studies in Epistemology is a biennial publicaton which offers a regular snapshot of state-of-the-art work in this important field.
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  46. John Hawthorne (2007). A Priority and Externalism. In Sanford Goldberg (ed.), Internalism and Externalism in Semantics and Epistemology. Oxford University Press 201--218.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   7 citations  
  47. John Hawthorne (2002). Blocking Definitions of Materialism. Philosophical Studies 110 (2):103-13.
    It is often thought that materialism about themind can be clarified using the concept of supervenience. But there is a difficulty. Amaterialist should admit the possibility ofghosts and thus should allow that a world mightduplicate the physical character of our worldand enjoy, in addition, immaterial beings withmental properties. So materialists can't claimthat every world that is physicallyindistinguishable from our world is alsomentally indistinguishable; and this is wellknown. What is less understood are thedifferent ways that immaterial add-ons can maketrouble for supervenience-theoreticformulations (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   8 citations  
  48. John Hawthorne (2005). The Case for Closure. In Matthias Steup & Ernest Sosa (eds.), Contemporary Debates in Epistemology. Blackwell 26-42.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   9 citations  
  49. John Hawthorne (2006). Testing for Context-Dependence. [REVIEW] Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 73 (2):443–450.
  50.  96
    Herman Cappelen & John Hawthorne (2011). Reply to Glanzberg, Soames and Weatherson. [REVIEW] Analysis 71 (1):143-56.
    One of Weatherson's main goals is to drive home a methodological point: We shouldn't be looking for deductive arguments for or against relativism – we should instead be evaluating inductive arguments designed to show that either relativism or some alternative offers the best explanation of some data. Our focus in Chapter Two on diagnostics for shared content allegedly encourages the search for deductive arguments and so does more harm than good. We have no methodological slogan of our own to offer. (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
1 — 50 / 158