Review of Philosophy and Psychology 1 (3):427-445 (2010)
The practice of conceptual analysis has undergone a revival in recent years. Although the extent of its role in philosophy is controversial, many now accept that conceptual analysis has at least some role to play. Granting this, I consider the relevance of empirical investigation to conceptual analysis. I do so by contrasting an extreme position (anti-empirical conceptual analysis) with a more moderate position (non-empirical conceptual analysis). I argue that anti-empirical conceptual analysis is not a viable position because it has no means for resolving conceptual disputes that arise between seemingly competent speakers of the language. This is illustrated by considering one such dispute that has been pressed by a prominent advocate of anti-empirical conceptual analysis: Bennett and Hacker ( 2003 ) assert that psychological predicates only logically apply to whole living animals, but many scientists and philosophers use the terms more broadly. I argue that to resolve such disputes we need to empirically investigate the common understanding of the terms at issue. I then show how this can be done by presenting the results of three studies concerning the application of “calculates” to computers.
|Keywords||Philosophy Philosophy of Science Developmental Psychology Epistemology Neurosciences Cognitive Psychology Philosophy of Mind|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
Rethinking Intuition: The Psychology of Intuition and its Role in Philosophical Inquiry.Michael R. DePaul & William Ramsey (eds.) - 1998 - Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
The Rise and Fall of Experimental Philosophy.Antti Kauppinen - 2007 - Philosophical Explorations 10 (2):95 – 118.
Intuitions About Consciousness: Experimental Studies.Joshua Knobe & Jesse J. Prinz - 2008 - Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 7 (1):67-83.
Two Conceptions of Subjective Experience.Justin Sytsma & Edouard Machery - 2010 - Philosophical Studies 151 (2):299-327.
Neuroscience and Philosophy: Brain, Mind, and Language.Maxwell Bennett, Daniel Dennett, Peter Hacker, John Searle & Daniel N. Robinson - 2007 - Columbia University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
God Knows (but Does God Believe?).Dylan Murray, Justin Sytsma & Jonathan Livengood - 2013 - Philosophical Studies 166 (1):83-107.
Concepts, Analysis, Generics and the Canberra Plan.Mark Johnston & Sarah-Jane Leslie - 2012 - Philosophical Perspectives 26 (1):113-171.
Artificial Language Philosophy of Science.Sebastian Lutz - 2012 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science (Browse Results) 2 (2):181–203.
Experimental Explication.Jonah N. Schupbach - 2015 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 91 (2).
Similar books and articles
Jackson's Empirical Assumptions. [REVIEW]Stephen P. Stich & Jonathan M. Weinberg - 2001 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 62 (3):637-643.
Expressivism, Representation, and the Nature of Conceptual Analysis.David Plunkett - 2011 - Philosophical Studies 156 (1):15-31.
Philosophy and the Front Line of Science.Tuomas K. Pernu - 2008 - The Quarterly Review of Biology 83 (1):29-36.
Atomism, Pluralism, and Conceptual Content.Daniel A. Weiskopf - 2009 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 79 (1):131-163.
Connective Conceptual Analysis and Psychology.Konrad Banicki - 2012 - Theory and Psychology 22 (3):310-323.
Concepts and Conceptual Analysis.Stephen Laurence & Eric Margolis - 2003 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 67 (2):253-282.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads466 ( #3,915 of 2,153,584 )
Recent downloads (6 months)16 ( #28,154 of 2,153,584 )
How can I increase my downloads?