Dianoia 63 (81):109-131 (2018)

Abstract
Resumen: Ante las críticas insistentes a la distinción entre el empirismo y el racionalismo, se han propuesto alternativas para comprender de manera más adecuada el quehacer de los filósofos modernos. Entre ellas está la distinción entre filosofía especulativa y experimental. Intentaré evaluar la validez de esta distinción para la filosofía moral experimental del siglo XVIII y, en particular, para la propuesta de Hume. Mostraré que si la distinción se entiende en términos excluyentes, resulta inapropiada porque el mismo Hume plantea que la especulación es lo que define a la filosofía. Además, antes que considerarlas como excluyentes, el filósofo escocés propone una conciliación entre la práctica de la experimentación y la teorización. Por último, sostendré que aquello que Hume considera como “falsa filosofía” no puede entenderse como sinónimo de filosofía especulativa.: A persistent criticism of the distinction between empiricism and ra-tionalism has provoked the emergence of new distinctions in order to under-stand modern philosophy in a more adequate way. One of those distinctions is that between speculative and experimental philosophy. My aim is to evalu-ate the validity of this distinction for eighteenth-century experimental moral philosophy in general and for Hume’s thought in particular. I will show that if this distinction is understood in exclusive terms, then it cannot be adequate because Hume himself states that speculation is what defines philoso-phy. Hume also proposes a reconciliation between experimental practice and theoretical activity instead of considering that they are mutually exclusive. Finally, I will make clear that what Hume condemns as “false philosophy” is not a synonym for speculative philosophy.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.22201/iifs.18704913e.2018.81.1574
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Translate to english
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 60,795
External links

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

The Empirical Stance.Bas C. van Fraassen - 2002 - Yale University Press.
The Empirical Stance.Bas C. van Fraassen - 2004 - Philosophical Studies 121 (2):171-192.
Early Modern Experimental Philosophy.Peter R. Anstey & Alberto Vanzo - 2016 - In Justin Sytsma & Wesley Buckwalter (eds.), A Companion to Experimental Philosophy. Blackwell. pp. 87-102.
The Origins of Early Modern Experimental Philosophy.Peter Anstey & Alberto Vanzo - 2012 - Intellectual History Review 22 (4):499-518.

View all 24 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Hume Y el escepticismo antiguo.Plínio Junqueira Smith - 2007 - Signos Filosóficos 9 (18):105-126.
David Hume y su adhesión inconsciente al escepticismo pirrónico.Lisandro Aguirre - 2010 - Revista de Filosofía y Teoría Política 41:13-40.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2019-01-17

Total views
9 ( #908,821 of 2,438,782 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #436,491 of 2,438,782 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes