Switch to: References

Citations of:

Imagination, Metaphysical Modality, and Modal Psychology

In Amy Kind & Christopher Badura, Epistemic Uses of Imagination. New York, NY: Routledge. pp. 79-99 (2021)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Epistemic Injustices in Philosophical Practice: African and Western.Michael Omoge - 2025 - Comparative Philosophy 16 (1):58-76.
    Arguably, there is a Eurocentric problem in philosophical practice, which, among many other things, has unwarrantedly given Western analytic philosophy an identity power that governs our collective social imagination regarding the ideal philosophy. In this paper, I argue that in both the African and Western philosophical communities, this identity power makes it such that the African analytic philosopher is the victim of different forms of epistemic injustice. In the African community, he is a victim of epistemic withdrawal and epistemic meekness; (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Imagination, Thought Experiments, and Personal Identity.Michael Omoge - 2023 - Croatian Journal of Philosophy 23 (67):69-88.
    Should we descry the nature of the self from thought experiments? Shaun Nichols says ‘maybe,’ but only if we use thought experiments that do not recruit the indexical “I” (non-I-recruiting). His reason is that the psychology of “I” perforce mandates that imagination responds to thought experiments that recruit it (I-recruiting) peculiarly. Here, I consider whether he is correct about non-I-recruiting personal identity thought experiments. I argue positively using the same framework, i.e., considering the underlying psychology.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Naturalised Modal Epistemology and Quasi-Realism.Michael Omoge - 2021 - South African Journal of Philosophy 40 (3):229-241.
    Given quasi-realism, the claim is that any attempt to naturalise modal epistemology would leave out absolute necessity. The reason, according to Simon Blackburn, is that we cannot offer an empirical psychological explanation for why we take any truth to be absolutely necessary, lest we lose any right to regard it as absolutely necessary. In this paper, I argue that not only can we offer such an explanation, but also that the explanation won’t come with a forfeiture of the involved necessity. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark