How to challenge intuitions empirically without risking skepticism

Midwest Studies in Philosophy 31 (1):318–343 (2007)

Authors
Jonathan Weinberg
University of Arizona
Abstract
Using empirical evidence to attack intuitions can be epistemically dangerous, because various of the complaints that one might raise against them (e.g., that they are fallible; that we possess no non-circular defense of their reliability) can be raised just as easily against perception itself. But the opponents of intuition wish to challenge intuitions without at the same time challenging the rest of our epistemic apparatus. How might this be done? Let us use the term “hopefulness” to refer to the extent to which we possess a good capacity for the detection and correction of the errors of any fallible source of evidence. I argue that we should not trust putative sources of evidence that are substantially lacking in hopefulness (even if they are basically reliable), and that we are indeed already operating under such a norm in our ordinary and scientific practices. I argue further that the philosophical practice of the appeal to intuitions is, in these terms, badly hopeless...
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/j.1475-4975.2007.00157.x
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 43,865
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Reasons and Persons.Derek Parfit - 1984 - Oxford University Press.
Knowledge and its Limits.Timothy Williamson - 2000 - Oxford University Press.

View all 46 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

The Intellectual Given.John Bengson - 2015 - Mind 124 (495):707-760.
Intuitions and Experiments: A Defense of the Case Method in Epistemology.Jennifer Nagel - 2012 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 85 (3):495-527.
Explaining Away Incompatibilist Intuitions.Dylan Murray & Eddy Nahmias - 2014 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 88 (2):434-467.

View all 110 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

A Defense of Intuitions.S. Matthew Liao - 2008 - Philosophical Studies 140 (2):247 - 262.
Problems with the Appeal to Intuition in Epistemology.Adam Feltz - 2008 - Philosophical Explorations 11 (2):131 – 141.
The Philosophical Personality Argument.Adam Feltz & Edward T. Cokely - 2012 - Philosophical Studies 161 (2):227-246.
Intuitions Are Inclinations to Believe.Joshua Earlenbaugh & Bernard Molyneux - 2009 - Philosophical Studies 145 (1):89 - 109.
Intuitions, Concepts, and Imagination.Frank Hofmann - 2010 - Philosophical Psychology 23 (4):529-546.
Intuitions and Experiments: A Defense of the Case Method in Epistemology.Jennifer Nagel - 2012 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 85 (3):495-527.
Some Hope for Intuitions: A Reply to Weinberg.Thomas Grundmann - 2010 - Philosophical Psychology 23 (4):481-509.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
425 ( #11,661 of 2,266,146 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
26 ( #30,479 of 2,266,146 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature