Reid's defense of common sense

Philosophers' Imprint 8 (3):1-14 (2008)
Abstract
Thomas Reid is often misread as defending common sense, if at all, only by relying on illicit premises about God or our natural faculties. On these theological or reliabilist misreadings, Reid makes common sense assertions where he cannot give arguments. This paper attempts to untangle Reid's defense of common sense by distinguishing four arguments: (a) the argument from madness, (b) the argument from natural faculties, (c) the argument from impotence, and (d) the argument from practical commitment. Of these, (a) and (c) do rely on problematic premises that are no more secure than claims of common sense itself. Yet (b) and (d) do not. This conclusion can be established directly by considering the arguments informally, but one might still worry that there is an implicit premise in them. In order to address this concern, I reconstruct the arguments in the framework of subjective Bayesianism. The worry becomes this: Do the arguments rely on specific values for the prior probability of some premises? Reid's appeals to our prior cognitive and practical commitments do not. Rather than relying on specific probability assignments, they draw on things that are part of the Bayesian framework itself, such as the nature of observation and the connection between belief and action. Contra the theological or reliabilist readings, the defense of common sense does not require indefensible premises.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history
Request removal from index
Download options
Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 26,162
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

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Reid, Kant and the Philosophy of Mind.Etienne Brun-Rovet - 2002 - Philosophical Quarterly 52 (209):495-510.
Thomas Reid and the Problem of Induction: From Common Experience to Common Sense.Benjamin W. Redekop - 2002 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 33 (1):35-57.
Justifying Group-Specific Common Morality.Carson Strong - 2008 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 29 (1):1-15.
Sociology and Common Sense.David Thomas - 1978 - Inquiry 21 (1-4):1 – 32.
Common Sense.Michael De Medeiros - 2010 - Weigl Publishers.
A Defence of Scottish Common Sense.Michael Pakaluk - 2002 - Philosophical Quarterly 52 (209):564-581.
The Virtues of Common Sense.Brian Grant - 2001 - Philosophy 76 (2):191-209.
Reid on Ridicule and Common Sense.Giovanni B. Grandi - 2008 - Journal of Scottish Philosophy 6 (1):71-90.

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2009-01-28

Total downloads

104 ( #46,540 of 2,152,520 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

7 ( #104,841 of 2,152,520 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.

Other forums