The PhilPapers SurveysHighest linear correlations (Back to contents)

Correlations with: Zombies:inconceivable

N = 931 (target faculty). Cut-off = +/-0.05

n < 10 omitted. Some redundant or trivial correlations are not shown.

Jump to: Main Survey questions | Philosophical orientation | Background questions

flip contingency tables

Main Survey questions

Answer Corrrelation coefficient
not Knowledge claims:invariantism0.173
invariantism not invariantism
inconceivable
21.2%(27/127)
65.3%(83/127)
not inconceivable
43.6%(219/502)
48%(241/502)
Response pairs: 728   p-value: < 0.001
Knowledge claims:contextualism0.165
contextualism not contextualism
inconceivable
59.8%(76/127)
26.7%(34/127)
not inconceivable
43.4%(218/502)
48.2%(242/502)
Response pairs: 728   p-value: < 0.001
not Truth:correspondence0.146
correspondence not correspondence
inconceivable
48.9%(68/139)
47.4%(66/139)
not inconceivable
60.8%(323/531)
33.8%(180/531)
Response pairs: 775   p-value: < 0.001
not Personal identity:further-fact view0.14
further-fact view not further-fact view
inconceivable
8.2%(11/134)
78.3%(105/134)
not inconceivable
17%(86/504)
64.6%(326/504)
Response pairs: 736   p-value: < 0.001
not Moral judgment:cognitivism0.139
cognitivism non-cognitivism
inconceivable
61.8%(86/139)
25.8%(36/139)
not inconceivable
76.3%(411/538)
18.2%(98/538)
Response pairs: 781   p-value: < 0.001
Abstract objects:nominalism0.123
Platonism nominalism
inconceivable
31.6%(45/142)
57.7%(82/142)
not inconceivable
47.5%(258/543)
44.1%(240/543)
Response pairs: 798   p-value: < 0.001
Mind:physicalism0.121
non-physicalism physicalism
inconceivable
20.1%(30/149)
68.4%(102/149)
not inconceivable
31.1%(174/558)
59.8%(334/558)
Response pairs: 818   p-value: < 0.001
Analytic-synthetic distinction:no0.114
yes no
inconceivable
57.4%(85/148)
37.1%(55/148)
not inconceivable
70.9%(395/557)
24.2%(135/557)
Response pairs: 818   p-value: 0.001
Time:B-theory0.114
A-theory B-theory
inconceivable
22%(22/100)
59%(59/100)
not inconceivable
33.5%(128/381)
46.1%(176/381)
Response pairs: 555   p-value: 0.007
Knowledge:empiricism0.11
rationalism empiricism
inconceivable
29%(43/148)
52%(77/148)
not inconceivable
38.3%(213/556)
39.3%(219/556)
Response pairs: 815   p-value: 0.001
A priori knowledge:no0.107
yes no
inconceivable
65.9%(97/147)
26.5%(39/147)
not inconceivable
78.1%(437/559)
16.2%(91/559)
Response pairs: 816   p-value: 0.002
Science:scientific anti-realism0.106
scientific realism scientific anti-realism
inconceivable
75.3%(110/146)
19.1%(28/146)
not inconceivable
81.5%(451/553)
12.2%(68/553)
Response pairs: 809   p-value: 0.002
Meta-ethics:moral anti-realism0.098
moral realism moral anti-realism
inconceivable
51.3%(74/144)
37.5%(54/144)
not inconceivable
65.3%(356/545)
30.2%(165/545)
Response pairs: 797   p-value: 0.005
Proper names:Fregean0.095
Millian Fregean
inconceivable
38.6%(51/132)
49.2%(65/132)
not inconceivable
46.9%(229/488)
39.3%(192/488)
Response pairs: 722   p-value: 0.01
not Laws of nature:non-Humean0.086
non-Humean Humean
inconceivable
57.8%(81/140)
32.8%(46/140)
not inconceivable
65.2%(346/530)
27.3%(145/530)
Response pairs: 773   p-value: 0.016
Truth:deflationary0.082
deflationary not deflationary
inconceivable
32.3%(45/139)
64%(89/139)
not inconceivable
24.8%(132/531)
69.8%(371/531)
Response pairs: 775   p-value: 0.022
not Perceptual experience:qualia theory0.079
qualia theory not qualia theory
inconceivable
12.4%(16/129)
78.2%(101/129)
not inconceivable
19.5%(89/456)
69.2%(316/456)
Response pairs: 676   p-value: 0.04
not Free will:libertarianism0.079
libertarianism not libertarianism
inconceivable
9.6%(14/145)
82.7%(120/145)
not inconceivable
17.2%(95/551)
75.6%(417/551)
Response pairs: 803   p-value: 0.025
Trolley problem:don't switch0.078
switch don't switch
inconceivable
77.1%(108/140)
12.1%(17/140)
not inconceivable
76.5%(401/524)
12.2%(64/524)
Response pairs: 772   p-value: 0.03
Metaphilosophy:naturalism0.075
non-naturalism naturalism
inconceivable
25.3%(35/138)
65.2%(90/138)
not inconceivable
29.9%(158/527)
56.7%(299/527)
Response pairs: 769   p-value: 0.037
Free will:compatibilism0.061
compatibilism not compatibilism
inconceivable
65.5%(95/145)
26.8%(39/145)
not inconceivable
60.2%(332/551)
32.6%(180/551)
Response pairs: 803   p-value: 0.084
Normative ethics:virtue ethics0.055
virtue ethics not virtue ethics
inconceivable
27.4%(36/131)
63.3%(83/131)
not inconceivable
20.4%(101/493)
67.3%(332/493)
Response pairs: 720   p-value: 0.14

Philosophical orientation

Answer Corrrelation coefficient
xian:Wittgenstein0.122
Wittgenstein not Wittgenstein
inconceivable
15.4%(23/149)
84.5%(126/149)
not inconceivable
5.3%(30/563)
94.6%(533/563)
Response pairs: 825   p-value: < 0.001
AOS:Aesthetics0.122
Aesthetics not Aesthetics
inconceivable
8%(12/149)
91.9%(137/149)
not inconceivable
2.8%(16/563)
97.1%(547/563)
Response pairs: 825   p-value: < 0.001
AOS:Philosophy of Physical Science0.118
Philosophy of Physical Science not Philosophy of Physical Science
inconceivable
9.3%(14/149)
90.6%(135/149)
not inconceivable
4.2%(24/563)
95.7%(539/563)
Response pairs: 825   p-value: < 0.001
xian:Spinoza0.112
Spinoza not Spinoza
inconceivable
6%(9/149)
93.9%(140/149)
not inconceivable
1.4%(8/563)
98.5%(555/563)
Response pairs: 825   p-value: 0.001
not xian:Russell0.094
Russell not Russell
inconceivable
3.3%(5/149)
96.6%(144/149)
not inconceivable
8.3%(47/563)
91.6%(516/563)
Response pairs: 825   p-value: 0.006
not AOS:Philosophy of Gender, Race, and Sexuality0.079
Philosophy of Gender, Race, and Sexuality not Philosophy of Gender, Race, and Sexuality
inconceivable
~0.6%(~1/149)
~99.3%(~148/149)
not inconceivable
2.1%(12/563)
97.8%(551/563)
Response pairs: 825   p-value: 0.023
not xian:Descartes0.077
Descartes not Descartes
inconceivable
~0.6%(~1/149)
~99.3%(~148/149)
not inconceivable
2.8%(16/563)
97.1%(547/563)
Response pairs: 825   p-value: 0.026
xian:Nietzsche0.073
Nietzsche not Nietzsche
inconceivable
3.3%(5/149)
96.6%(144/149)
not inconceivable
1.5%(9/563)
98.4%(554/563)
Response pairs: 825   p-value: 0.036
not xian:Moore0.07
Moore not Moore
inconceivable
~0.6%(~1/149)
~99.3%(~148/149)
not inconceivable
3.7%(21/563)
96.2%(542/563)
Response pairs: 825   p-value: 0.044
AOS:Philosophy of Language0.068
Philosophy of Language not Philosophy of Language
inconceivable
26.8%(40/149)
73.1%(109/149)
not inconceivable
18.6%(105/563)
81.3%(458/563)
Response pairs: 825   p-value: 0.05
AOS:19th Century Philosophy0.067
19th Century Philosophy not 19th Century Philosophy
inconceivable
6.7%(10/149)
93.2%(139/149)
not inconceivable
3%(17/563)
96.9%(546/563)
Response pairs: 825   p-value: 0.054
AOS:Philosophy of Probability0.063
Philosophy of Probability not Philosophy of Probability
inconceivable
3.3%(5/149)
96.6%(144/149)
not inconceivable
1.2%(7/563)
98.7%(556/563)
Response pairs: 825   p-value: 0.07
xian:Marx0.061
Marx not Marx
inconceivable
2.6%(4/149)
97.3%(145/149)
not inconceivable
0.8%(5/563)
99.1%(558/563)
Response pairs: 825   p-value: 0.079
AOS:Applied Ethics0.06
Applied Ethics not Applied Ethics
inconceivable
5.3%(8/149)
94.6%(141/149)
not inconceivable
3.1%(18/563)
96.8%(545/563)
Response pairs: 825   p-value: 0.085
xian:Davidson0.05
Davidson not Davidson
inconceivable
8%(12/149)
91.9%(137/149)
not inconceivable
5.1%(29/563)
94.8%(534/563)
Response pairs: 825   p-value: 0.151

Background questions

Answer Corrrelation coefficient
phd_region:Australasia0.083
Australasia not Australasia
inconceivable
7.3%(11/149)
92.6%(138/149)
not inconceivable
2.3%(13/563)
97.6%(550/563)
Response pairs: 825   p-value: 0.017
affil:region:Australasia0.077
Australasia not Australasia
inconceivable
10.7%(16/149)
89.2%(133/149)
not inconceivable
4.6%(26/563)
95.3%(537/563)
Response pairs: 825   p-value: 0.026
not nationality_region:Other0.054
Other not Other
inconceivable
6%(9/149)
93.9%(140/149)
not inconceivable
8.7%(49/563)
91.2%(514/563)
Response pairs: 825   p-value: 0.121