Sign in
|
Create an account
PhilPapers
PhilPeople
PhilArchive
PhilEvents
PhilJobs
Syntax
Advanced Search
New
All new items
Books
Journal articles
Manuscripts
Topics
All Categories
Metaphysics and Epistemology
Metaphysics and Epistemology
Epistemology
Metaphilosophy
Metaphysics
Philosophy of Action
Philosophy of Language
Philosophy of Mind
Philosophy of Religion
M&E, Misc
Value Theory
Value Theory
Aesthetics
Applied Ethics
Meta-Ethics
Normative Ethics
Philosophy of Gender, Race, and Sexuality
Philosophy of Law
Social and Political Philosophy
Value Theory, Miscellaneous
Science, Logic, and Mathematics
Science, Logic, and Mathematics
Logic and Philosophy of Logic
Philosophy of Biology
Philosophy of Cognitive Science
Philosophy of Computing and Information
Philosophy of Mathematics
Philosophy of Physical Science
Philosophy of Social Science
Philosophy of Probability
General Philosophy of Science
Philosophy of Science, Misc
History of Western Philosophy
History of Western Philosophy
Ancient Greek and Roman Philosophy
Medieval and Renaissance Philosophy
17th/18th Century Philosophy
19th Century Philosophy
20th Century Philosophy
History of Western Philosophy, Misc
Philosophical Traditions
Philosophical Traditions
African/Africana Philosophy
Asian Philosophy
Continental Philosophy
European Philosophy
Philosophy of the Americas
Philosophical Traditions, Miscellaneous
Philosophy, Misc
Philosophy, Misc
Philosophy, Introductions and Anthologies
Philosophy, General Works
Teaching Philosophy
Philosophy, Miscellaneous
Other Academic Areas
Other Academic Areas
Natural Sciences
Social Sciences
Cognitive Sciences
Formal Sciences
Arts and Humanities
Professional Areas
Other Academic Areas, Misc
Journals
Submit material
Submit a book or article
Upload a bibliography
Personal page tracking
Archives we track
Information for publishers
More
Introduction
Submitting to PhilPapers
Frequently Asked Questions
Subscriptions
Editor's Guide
The Categorization Project
For Publishers
For Archive Admins
Contact us
PhilPapers Surveys
API
Bargain Finder
About PhilPapers
Syntax
Advanced Search
Sign in
Create an account
The PhilPapers Surveys
Preliminary Survey results
(
Back to contents
)
Note: set response grain to "fine" for details on "other" responses.
Population
AOS
Response details
All respondents
Target faculty
Philosophy faculty or PhD
Philosophy faculty/PhD, non-target
Philosophy graduate student
Philosophy undergraduate
No philosophy affiliation listed
All respondents
17th/18th Century Philosophy
19th Century Philosophy
20th Century Philosophy
Aesthetics
African/Africana Philosophy
Ancient Greek and Roman Philosophy
Applied Ethics
Arts and Humanities
Asian Philosophy
Cognitive Sciences
Continental Philosophy
Decision Theory
Epistemology
Formal Sciences
General Philosophy of Science
Logic and Philosophy of Logic
Medieval and Renaissance Philosophy
Meta-Ethics
Metaphilosophy
Metaphysics
Natural Sciences
Normative Ethics
Philosophy of Action
Philosophy of Biology
Philosophy of Cognitive Science
Philosophy of Computing and Information
Philosophy of Gender, Race, and Sexuality
Philosophy of Language
Philosophy of Law
Philosophy of Mathematics
Philosophy of Mind
Philosophy of Physical Science
Philosophy of Probability
Philosophy of Religion
Philosophy of Social Science
Philosophy of the Americas
Philosophy, General Works
Philosophy, Introductions and Anthologies
Professional Areas
Social and Political Philosophy
Social Sciences
Teaching Philosophy
coarse
medium
fine
A priori knowledge: yes or no?
Accept: yes
53 / 102 (52.0%)
Lean toward: yes
24 / 102 (23.5%)
Lean toward: no
10 / 102 (9.8%)
The question is too unclear to answer
7 / 102 (6.9%)
Accept: no
6 / 102 (5.9%)
Skip
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Agnostic/undecided
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Abstract objects: Platonism or nominalism?
Lean toward: nominalism
27 / 102 (26.5%)
Lean toward: Platonism
20 / 102 (19.6%)
Accept: Platonism
13 / 102 (12.7%)
Insufficiently familiar with the issue
11 / 102 (10.8%)
Accept: nominalism
8 / 102 (7.8%)
Agnostic/undecided
6 / 102 (5.9%)
Accept another alternative
6 / 102 (5.9%)
Reject both
5 / 102 (4.9%)
Accept an intermediate view
3 / 102 (2.9%)
The question is too unclear to answer
2 / 102 (2.0%)
Skip
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Aesthetic value: objective or subjective?
Accept: subjective
27 / 102 (26.5%)
Lean toward: objective
22 / 102 (21.6%)
Accept: objective
15 / 102 (14.7%)
Lean toward: subjective
12 / 102 (11.8%)
The question is too unclear to answer
9 / 102 (8.8%)
Accept an intermediate view
5 / 102 (4.9%)
Insufficiently familiar with the issue
3 / 102 (2.9%)
Accept both
3 / 102 (2.9%)
Accept another alternative
2 / 102 (2.0%)
Agnostic/undecided
2 / 102 (2.0%)
Skip
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Reject both
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Analytic-synthetic distinction: yes or no?
Lean toward: yes
43 / 102 (42.2%)
Accept: yes
37 / 102 (36.3%)
Lean toward: no
8 / 102 (7.8%)
Accept: no
8 / 102 (7.8%)
The question is too unclear to answer
3 / 102 (2.9%)
Agnostic/undecided
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Insufficiently familiar with the issue
1 / 102 (1.0%)
There is no fact of the matter
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Epistemic justification: internalism or externalism?
Lean toward: internalism
30 / 102 (29.4%)
Lean toward: externalism
21 / 102 (20.6%)
Accept an intermediate view
11 / 102 (10.8%)
Accept: externalism
10 / 102 (9.8%)
Accept: internalism
7 / 102 (6.9%)
Insufficiently familiar with the issue
6 / 102 (5.9%)
Accept both
6 / 102 (5.9%)
Agnostic/undecided
5 / 102 (4.9%)
The question is too unclear to answer
2 / 102 (2.0%)
Skip
2 / 102 (2.0%)
Accept another alternative
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Other
1 / 102 (1.0%)
External world: idealism, skepticism, or non-skeptical realism?
Accept: non-skeptical realism
71 / 102 (69.6%)
Lean toward: non-skeptical realism
24 / 102 (23.5%)
Lean toward: skepticism
2 / 102 (2.0%)
Accept another alternative
2 / 102 (2.0%)
Accept an intermediate view
2 / 102 (2.0%)
Lean toward: idealism
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Free will: compatibilism, libertarianism, or no free will?
Accept: compatibilism
40 / 102 (39.2%)
Lean toward: compatibilism
28 / 102 (27.5%)
Lean toward: libertarianism
7 / 102 (6.9%)
Accept: no free will
7 / 102 (6.9%)
Accept: libertarianism
4 / 102 (3.9%)
Agnostic/undecided
4 / 102 (3.9%)
The question is too unclear to answer
3 / 102 (2.9%)
Accept another alternative
3 / 102 (2.9%)
Lean toward: no free will
3 / 102 (2.9%)
Insufficiently familiar with the issue
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Accept an intermediate view
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Other
1 / 102 (1.0%)
God: theism or atheism?
Accept: atheism
72 / 102 (70.6%)
Lean toward: atheism
9 / 102 (8.8%)
Agnostic/undecided
7 / 102 (6.9%)
Accept: theism
6 / 102 (5.9%)
Other
3 / 102 (2.9%)
The question is too unclear to answer
2 / 102 (2.0%)
Skip
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Lean toward: theism
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Accept another alternative
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Knowledge claims: contextualism, relativism, or invariantism?
Lean toward: contextualism
27 / 102 (26.5%)
Lean toward: invariantism
21 / 102 (20.6%)
Accept: invariantism
13 / 102 (12.7%)
Accept: contextualism
12 / 102 (11.8%)
Insufficiently familiar with the issue
11 / 102 (10.8%)
Agnostic/undecided
7 / 102 (6.9%)
Lean toward: relativism
4 / 102 (3.9%)
The question is too unclear to answer
3 / 102 (2.9%)
Reject one, undecided between others
2 / 102 (2.0%)
Accept: relativism
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Other
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Knowledge: empiricism or rationalism?
Lean toward: empiricism
28 / 102 (27.5%)
Lean toward: rationalism
16 / 102 (15.7%)
Accept: rationalism
16 / 102 (15.7%)
The question is too unclear to answer
14 / 102 (13.7%)
Accept: empiricism
8 / 102 (7.8%)
Accept an intermediate view
7 / 102 (6.9%)
Accept another alternative
4 / 102 (3.9%)
Agnostic/undecided
3 / 102 (2.9%)
Accept both
3 / 102 (2.9%)
Reject both
2 / 102 (2.0%)
Insufficiently familiar with the issue
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Laws of nature: Humean or non-Humean?
Lean toward: non-Humean
30 / 102 (29.4%)
Accept: non-Humean
24 / 102 (23.5%)
Lean toward: Humean
13 / 102 (12.7%)
Agnostic/undecided
12 / 102 (11.8%)
Insufficiently familiar with the issue
10 / 102 (9.8%)
Accept: Humean
6 / 102 (5.9%)
Skip
3 / 102 (2.9%)
The question is too unclear to answer
2 / 102 (2.0%)
Other
1 / 102 (1.0%)
There is no fact of the matter
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Logic: classical or non-classical?
Lean toward: classical
27 / 102 (26.5%)
Accept: classical
25 / 102 (24.5%)
Insufficiently familiar with the issue
20 / 102 (19.6%)
Lean toward: non-classical
10 / 102 (9.8%)
Agnostic/undecided
7 / 102 (6.9%)
Accept: non-classical
3 / 102 (2.9%)
There is no fact of the matter
2 / 102 (2.0%)
The question is too unclear to answer
2 / 102 (2.0%)
Skip
2 / 102 (2.0%)
Accept another alternative
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Accept an intermediate view
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Reject both
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Accept both
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Mental content: internalism or externalism?
Lean toward: externalism
34 / 102 (33.3%)
Accept: externalism
17 / 102 (16.7%)
Lean toward: internalism
17 / 102 (16.7%)
Agnostic/undecided
9 / 102 (8.8%)
Insufficiently familiar with the issue
7 / 102 (6.9%)
The question is too unclear to answer
4 / 102 (3.9%)
Accept an intermediate view
4 / 102 (3.9%)
Accept both
3 / 102 (2.9%)
Accept another alternative
2 / 102 (2.0%)
Accept: internalism
2 / 102 (2.0%)
There is no fact of the matter
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Skip
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Other
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Meta-ethics: moral realism or moral anti-realism?
Accept: moral realism
42 / 102 (41.2%)
Accept: moral anti-realism
17 / 102 (16.7%)
Lean toward: moral realism
15 / 102 (14.7%)
Lean toward: moral anti-realism
10 / 102 (9.8%)
Accept an intermediate view
7 / 102 (6.9%)
The question is too unclear to answer
6 / 102 (5.9%)
Accept another alternative
3 / 102 (2.9%)
Agnostic/undecided
2 / 102 (2.0%)
Metaphilosophy: naturalism or non-naturalism?
Lean toward: naturalism
23 / 102 (22.5%)
Accept: naturalism
22 / 102 (21.6%)
Accept: non-naturalism
17 / 102 (16.7%)
Lean toward: non-naturalism
13 / 102 (12.7%)
Insufficiently familiar with the issue
8 / 102 (7.8%)
The question is too unclear to answer
8 / 102 (7.8%)
Agnostic/undecided
5 / 102 (4.9%)
Reject both
3 / 102 (2.9%)
Accept another alternative
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Accept an intermediate view
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Accept both
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Mind: physicalism or non-physicalism?
Accept: physicalism
31 / 102 (30.4%)
Lean toward: physicalism
27 / 102 (26.5%)
Lean toward: non-physicalism
17 / 102 (16.7%)
The question is too unclear to answer
9 / 102 (8.8%)
Accept: non-physicalism
8 / 102 (7.8%)
Agnostic/undecided
5 / 102 (4.9%)
Reject both
2 / 102 (2.0%)
Skip
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Insufficiently familiar with the issue
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Accept an intermediate view
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Moral judgment: cognitivism or non-cognitivism?
Accept: cognitivism
63 / 102 (61.8%)
Lean toward: cognitivism
13 / 102 (12.7%)
Lean toward: non-cognitivism
8 / 102 (7.8%)
Accept: non-cognitivism
6 / 102 (5.9%)
Accept another alternative
4 / 102 (3.9%)
Accept an intermediate view
4 / 102 (3.9%)
The question is too unclear to answer
2 / 102 (2.0%)
Accept both
2 / 102 (2.0%)
Moral motivation: internalism or externalism?
Accept: internalism
27 / 102 (26.5%)
Accept: externalism
23 / 102 (22.5%)
Lean toward: internalism
18 / 102 (17.6%)
Lean toward: externalism
14 / 102 (13.7%)
The question is too unclear to answer
9 / 102 (8.8%)
Accept an intermediate view
4 / 102 (3.9%)
Agnostic/undecided
3 / 102 (2.9%)
Reject both
2 / 102 (2.0%)
Skip
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Accept both
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Newcomb's problem: one box or two boxes?
Accept: two boxes
25 / 102 (24.5%)
Insufficiently familiar with the issue
19 / 102 (18.6%)
Lean toward: two boxes
13 / 102 (12.7%)
Accept: one box
13 / 102 (12.7%)
Lean toward: one box
12 / 102 (11.8%)
Agnostic/undecided
11 / 102 (10.8%)
Skip
3 / 102 (2.9%)
There is no fact of the matter
2 / 102 (2.0%)
The question is too unclear to answer
2 / 102 (2.0%)
Other
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Accept another alternative
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Normative ethics: deontology, consequentialism, or virtue ethics?
Accept: consequentialism
16 / 102 (15.7%)
Accept: deontology
13 / 102 (12.7%)
Lean toward: consequentialism
12 / 102 (11.8%)
Reject all
9 / 102 (8.8%)
Lean toward: deontology
9 / 102 (8.8%)
Accept more than one
9 / 102 (8.8%)
Lean toward: virtue ethics
7 / 102 (6.9%)
Accept an intermediate view
6 / 102 (5.9%)
Accept: virtue ethics
5 / 102 (4.9%)
Agnostic/undecided
4 / 102 (3.9%)
The question is too unclear to answer
4 / 102 (3.9%)
Accept another alternative
4 / 102 (3.9%)
Reject one, undecided between others
3 / 102 (2.9%)
Skip
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Perceptual experience: disjunctivism, qualia theory, representationalism, or sense-datum theory?
Insufficiently familiar with the issue
23 / 102 (22.5%)
Lean toward: representationalism
17 / 102 (16.7%)
Accept: representationalism
13 / 102 (12.7%)
Agnostic/undecided
11 / 102 (10.8%)
Lean toward: disjunctivism
11 / 102 (10.8%)
Lean toward: qualia theory
5 / 102 (4.9%)
Accept another alternative
5 / 102 (4.9%)
Reject one or two, undecided between others
3 / 102 (2.9%)
Accept: qualia theory
3 / 102 (2.9%)
Accept more than one
2 / 102 (2.0%)
The question is too unclear to answer
2 / 102 (2.0%)
Accept an intermediate view
2 / 102 (2.0%)
Reject all
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Lean toward: sense-datum theory
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Skip
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Accept: sense-datum theory
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Other
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Personal identity: biological view, psychological view, or further-fact view?
Lean toward: psychological view
27 / 102 (26.5%)
Accept: psychological view
14 / 102 (13.7%)
Agnostic/undecided
11 / 102 (10.8%)
Lean toward: further-fact view
9 / 102 (8.8%)
Lean toward: biological view
7 / 102 (6.9%)
Insufficiently familiar with the issue
5 / 102 (4.9%)
Accept more than one
5 / 102 (4.9%)
Reject all
4 / 102 (3.9%)
Accept: biological view
4 / 102 (3.9%)
Accept another alternative
4 / 102 (3.9%)
Accept: further-fact view
4 / 102 (3.9%)
The question is too unclear to answer
3 / 102 (2.9%)
Reject one, undecided between others
2 / 102 (2.0%)
There is no fact of the matter
2 / 102 (2.0%)
Accept an intermediate view
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Politics: communitarianism, egalitarianism, or libertarianism?
Accept: egalitarianism
20 / 102 (19.6%)
Lean toward: egalitarianism
18 / 102 (17.6%)
Lean toward: communitarianism
8 / 102 (7.8%)
Accept more than one
7 / 102 (6.9%)
Lean toward: libertarianism
7 / 102 (6.9%)
Agnostic/undecided
6 / 102 (5.9%)
The question is too unclear to answer
6 / 102 (5.9%)
Accept another alternative
6 / 102 (5.9%)
Accept an intermediate view
5 / 102 (4.9%)
Reject all
5 / 102 (4.9%)
Insufficiently familiar with the issue
5 / 102 (4.9%)
Accept: libertarianism
3 / 102 (2.9%)
Reject one, undecided between others
2 / 102 (2.0%)
Accept: communitarianism
2 / 102 (2.0%)
Other
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Skip
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Proper names: Fregean or Millian?
Lean toward: Fregean
23 / 102 (22.5%)
Lean toward: Millian
21 / 102 (20.6%)
Insufficiently familiar with the issue
18 / 102 (17.6%)
Accept: Millian
16 / 102 (15.7%)
Accept: Fregean
8 / 102 (7.8%)
Agnostic/undecided
8 / 102 (7.8%)
Accept another alternative
2 / 102 (2.0%)
The question is too unclear to answer
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Skip
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Accept an intermediate view
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Other
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Reject both
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Accept both
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Science: scientific realism or scientific anti-realism?
Accept: scientific realism
47 / 102 (46.1%)
Lean toward: scientific realism
35 / 102 (34.3%)
Lean toward: scientific anti-realism
7 / 102 (6.9%)
Insufficiently familiar with the issue
5 / 102 (4.9%)
Accept another alternative
3 / 102 (2.9%)
Skip
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Reject both
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Agnostic/undecided
1 / 102 (1.0%)
The question is too unclear to answer
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Accept an intermediate view
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Teletransporter (new matter): survival or death?
Lean toward: survival
26 / 102 (25.5%)
Lean toward: death
18 / 102 (17.6%)
Accept: survival
17 / 102 (16.7%)
Accept: death
16 / 102 (15.7%)
Agnostic/undecided
8 / 102 (7.8%)
Insufficiently familiar with the issue
7 / 102 (6.9%)
There is no fact of the matter
5 / 102 (4.9%)
The question is too unclear to answer
2 / 102 (2.0%)
Reject both
2 / 102 (2.0%)
Other
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Time: A-theory or B-theory?
Insufficiently familiar with the issue
44 / 102 (43.1%)
Agnostic/undecided
13 / 102 (12.7%)
Accept: B-theory
11 / 102 (10.8%)
Lean toward: B-theory
10 / 102 (9.8%)
Lean toward: A-theory
8 / 102 (7.8%)
Skip
6 / 102 (5.9%)
The question is too unclear to answer
3 / 102 (2.9%)
Accept both
3 / 102 (2.9%)
Accept: A-theory
2 / 102 (2.0%)
There is no fact of the matter
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Reject both
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Trolley problem (five straight ahead, one on side track, turn requires switching, what ought one do?): switch or don't switch?
Accept: switch
64 / 102 (62.7%)
Lean toward: switch
16 / 102 (15.7%)
The question is too unclear to answer
7 / 102 (6.9%)
Lean toward: don't switch
5 / 102 (4.9%)
Accept: don't switch
4 / 102 (3.9%)
There is no fact of the matter
2 / 102 (2.0%)
Other
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Agnostic/undecided
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Insufficiently familiar with the issue
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Reject both
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Truth: correspondence, deflationary, or epistemic?
Lean toward: correspondence
34 / 102 (33.3%)
Lean toward: deflationary
20 / 102 (19.6%)
Accept: correspondence
18 / 102 (17.6%)
Accept: deflationary
10 / 102 (9.8%)
Agnostic/undecided
5 / 102 (4.9%)
Insufficiently familiar with the issue
3 / 102 (2.9%)
Lean toward: epistemic
3 / 102 (2.9%)
Reject all
2 / 102 (2.0%)
Reject one, undecided between others
2 / 102 (2.0%)
Accept more than one
2 / 102 (2.0%)
Accept an intermediate view
1 / 102 (1.0%)
The question is too unclear to answer
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Accept: epistemic
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Zombies: inconceivable, conceivable but not metaphysically possible, or metaphysically possible?
Insufficiently familiar with the issue
17 / 102 (16.7%)
Lean toward: conceivable but not metaphysically possible
14 / 102 (13.7%)
Accept: metaphysically possible
14 / 102 (13.7%)
Accept: conceivable but not metaphysically possible
13 / 102 (12.7%)
Lean toward: metaphysically possible
13 / 102 (12.7%)
Agnostic/undecided
8 / 102 (7.8%)
Lean toward: inconceivable
7 / 102 (6.9%)
The question is too unclear to answer
6 / 102 (5.9%)
Accept: inconceivable
5 / 102 (4.9%)
Accept another alternative
2 / 102 (2.0%)
Reject all
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Skip
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Reject one, undecided between others
1 / 102 (1.0%)
Back to contents
loading ..