Is Philosophy Exceptional? A Corpus-Based, Quantitative Study

Social Epistemology (forthcoming)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Drawing on the epistemology of logic literature on anti-exceptionalism about logic, we set out to investigate the following metaphilosophical questions empirically: Is philosophy special? Are its methods (dis)continuous with science? More specifically, we test the following metaphilosophical hypotheses empirically: philosophical deductivism, philosophical inductivism, and philosophical abductivism. Using indicator words to classify arguments by type (namely, deductive, inductive, and abductive arguments), we searched through a large corpus of philosophical texts mined from the JSTOR database (n = 435,703) to find patterns of argumentation. The results of our quantitative, corpus-based study suggest that deductive arguments are significantly more common than abductive arguments and inductive arguments in philosophical texts overall, but they are gradually and steadily giving way to non-deductive (i.e., inductive and abductive) arguments in academic philosophy.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
MIZIPE-2
Upload history
Archival date: 2022-08-04
View other versions
Added to PP index
2022-08-04

Total views
44 ( #65,503 of 71,446 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
44 ( #18,760 of 71,446 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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