Are Philosophers Good Intuition Predictors?

Philosophical Psychology 29 (7):1004-1014 (2016)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Some philosophers have criticized experimental philosophy for being superfluous. Jackson implies that experimental philosophy studies are unnecessary. More recently, Dunaway, Edmunds, and Manley empirically demonstrate that experimental studies do not deliver surprising results, which is a pro tanto reason for foregoing conducting such studies. This paper gives theoretical and empirical considerations against the superfluity criticism. The questions concerning the surprisingness of experimental philosophy studies have not been properly disambiguated, and their metaphilosophical significance have not been properly assessed. Once the most relevant question is identified, a re-analysis of Dunaway and colleagues’ data actually undermines the superfluity criticism.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
LIAAPG
Upload history
Archival date: 2016-01-27
View other versions
Added to PP index
2016-01-27

Total views
551 ( #8,213 of 54,380 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
78 ( #7,536 of 54,380 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.