Profile for Carlo Penco

My philosophical views

The answers shown here are not necessarily the same provided as part of the 2009 PhilPapers Survey. These answers can be updated at any time.

See also:

Question	Answer	Comments
A priori knowledge: yes or no?	Accept: yes	How could I think, otherwise? [the comma is on purpose]
Abstract objects: Platonism or nominalism?	Lean toward: nominalism	"nominalism" and "platonism" are too old categories for our abstract stuff; they are too remiscent of: "onta" or "legomena"? Bu we may use "existence" as "what can be derived in a proof", and there are many kinds of proofs (something like that in Wittgenstein's remarks). Certainly a name is not enough to justify an abstract object, but an abstract object is enough to justify the use of a proper name (square root of 2, for instance).
Aesthetic value: objective or subjective?	Lean toward: objective	ignorance may make us give value to horrible things
Analytic-synthetic distinction: yes or no?	Accept: yes	Certainly yes, as Quine also does - just with some restrictions:)
Epistemic justification: internalism or externalism?	Lean toward: internalism
External world: idealism, skepticism, or non-skeptical realism?	Reject all	If somebody will give us a clear concept of "internal world" the question could be answered. But I have no idea of what an internal world might be.
Free will: compatibilism, libertarianism, or no free will?	Lean toward: compatibilism
God: theism or atheism?	There is no fact of the matter
Knowledge: empiricism or rationalism?	Accept: rationalism	no inference, no knowledge
Knowledge claims: contextualism, relativism, or invariantism?	Accept: contextualism	in this context there is no other chance.
Laws of nature: Humean or non-Humean?	Lean toward: non-Humean	and miracles follow the laws of nature, if you get to know them better...
Logic: classical or non-classical?	Accept both	they are logics, aren't they?
Mental content: internalism or externalism?	Reject both	old fashioned debate;we need definitions of mental contents which avoid such a bold dichotomy
Meta-ethics: moral realism or moral anti-realism?	Lean toward: moral anti-realism	"omnia munda mundis" sounds an anti-realistic stance in meta ethics
Metaphilosophy: naturalism or non-naturalism?	There is no fact of the matter	There are too many theories behind both naturalism and non-naturalism. If non-naturalism is to accept the relevance and non reducibility of the normative to neurological features of the brain, well I lean towards non naturalism. If non naturalism is to accept some "reality" not grounded on natural facts, then I lean towards naturalism.
Mind: physicalism or non-physicalism?	Accept an intermediate view	is anomalous monism physicalist?
Moral judgment: cognitivism or non-cognitivism?	Lean toward: cognitivism
Moral motivation: internalism or externalism?	Lean toward: externalism	sometimes motivations come after judgements
Newcomb's problem: one box or two boxes?	Accept: one box	no rational ground for that; just a feeling and a disposition to guess.
Normative ethics: deontology, consequentialism, or virtue ethics?	Lean toward: virtue ethics
Perceptual experience: disjunctivism, qualia theory, representationalism, or sense-datum theory?	Lean toward: representationalism
Personal identity: biological view, psychological view, or further-fact view?	Accept: psychological view
Politics: communitarianism, egalitarianism, or libertarianism?	The question is too unclear to answer
Proper names: Fregean or Millian?	Accept: Fregean
Science: scientific realism or scientific anti-realism?	Lean toward: scientific realism	It depends very much on which science is concerned; we cannot discard Einstein's worries too easily (physics); at the same time we cannot discard Wittgenstein's attitude towards mathematics (anti-realism)
Teletransporter (new matter): survival or death?	Lean toward: survival	Have you seen "Space Balls"?
Time: A-theory or B-theory?	Insufficiently familiar with the issue
Trolley problem (five straight ahead, one on side track, turn requires switching, what ought one do?): switch or don't switch?	Lean toward: switch	unless I know personally the person who will be damaged; that would make a real difference
Truth: correspondence, deflationary, or epistemic?	Lean toward: deflationary
Zombies: inconceivable, conceivable but not metaphysically possible, or metaphysically possible?	Reject one, undecided between others	how could we say that something logically possible is inconceivable?

Applied ethics	Epistemology	History of Western Philosophy	Meta-ethics	Metaphysics	Normative ethics
Philosophy of biology	Philosophy of language	Philosophy of mind	Philosophy of religion	Science Logic and Mathematics	More ...