Great Minds Do Not Think Alike: Philosophers’ Views Predicted By Reflection, Education, Personality, And Other Demographic Differences
Review of Philosophy and Psychology:1-38 (forthcoming)
AbstractPrior research found correlations between reflection test performance and philosophical tendencies among laypeople. In two large studies (total N = 1299)—one pre-registered—many of these correlations were replicated in a sample that included both laypeople and philosophers. For example, reflection test performance predicted preferring atheism over theism and instrumental harm over harm avoidance on the trolley problem. However, most reflection-philosophy correlations were undetected when controlling for other factors such as numeracy, preferences for open-minded thinking, personality, philosophical training, age, and gender. Nonetheless, some correlations between reflection and philosophical views survived this multivariate analysis and were only partially confounded with either education or self-reported reasoning preferences. Unreflective thinking still predicted believing in God whereas reflective thinking still predicted believing that (a) proper names like ‘Santa’ do not necessarily refer to entities that actually exist and (b) science does reveal the fundamental nature of the world. So some robust relationships between reflection and philosophical tendencies were detected even among philosophers, and yet there was clearly more to the link between reflection and philosophy. To this end, demographic and metaphilosophical hypotheses are considered.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
References found in this work
What Do Philosophers Believe?David Bourget & David J. Chalmers - 2014 - Philosophical Studies 170 (3):465-500.
The Problem of Abortion and the Doctrine of the Double Effect.Philippa Foot - 1967 - Oxford Review 5:5-15.
Citations of this work
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Women and ‘the Philosophical Personality’: Evaluating Whether Gender Differences in the Cognitive Reflection Test Have Significance for Explaining the Gender Gap in Philosophy.Christina Easton - 2018 - Synthese 198 (1):139-167.
Untangling False Assumptions Regarding Atheism and Health.Jonathan Morgan - 2013 - Zygon 48 (1):9-19.
The SAGE Handbook of Personality and Individual Differences. Vol. 1. The Science of Personality and Individual Differences.Virgil Zeigler-Hill & Todd K. Shackelford (eds.) - 2018 - SAGE Publications Ltd..
Not All Who Ponder Count Costs: Arithmetic Reflection Predicts Utilitarian Tendencies, but Logical Reflection Predicts Both Deontological and Utilitarian Tendencies.Nick Byrd & Paul Conway - 2019 - Cognition 192 (103995).
Enactivist Big Five Theory.Garri Hovhannisyan & John Vervaeke - 2022 - Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 21 (2):341-375.
Are There Gender Differences in Cognitive Reflection? Invariance and Differences Related to Mathematics.Caterina Primi, Maria Anna Donati, Francesca Chiesi & Kinga Morsanyi - 2018 - Thinking and Reasoning 24 (2):258-279.
The Psychology of Philosophy: Associating Philosophical Views with Psychological Traits in Professional Philosophers.David B. Yaden & Derek E. Anderson - forthcoming - Philosophical Psychology:1-35.
Epistemic Vice Predicts Acceptance of Covid-19 Misinformation.Marco Meyer, Mark Alfano & Boudewijn De Bruin - manuscript
What is an Animal Personality?Marie I. Kaiser & Caroline Müller - 2021 - Biology and Philosophy 36 (1):1-25.
Atheism and Inferential Bias.Kelly James Clark - 2017 - European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 9 (2):43-56.
On the Distinction Between Rationality and Intelligence: Implications for Understanding Individual Differences in Reasoning.Keith E. Stanovich - 2012 - The Oxford Handbook of Thinking and Reasoning.
The Relation of Rational and Experiential Information Processing Styles to Personality, Basic Beliefs, and the Ratio-Bias Phenomenon.Rosemary Pacini & Seymour Epstein - 1999 - Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 76 (6):972.
Gender Differences in Performance Predictions: Evidence From the Cognitive Reflection Test.Patrick Ring, Levent Neyse, Tamas David-Barett & Ulrich Schmidt - 2016 - Frontier in Psychology 2016.
The Transdisciplinary Philosophy-of-Science Paradigm for Research on Individuals: Foundations for the Science of Personality and Individual Differences.Jana Uher - 2018 - In Virgil Zeigler-Hill & Todd K. Shackelford (eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Personality and Individual Differences. Vol. 1. The Science of Personality and Individual Differences. London, U.K.: SAGE Publications Ltd.. pp. 84-109.
Explanation in a Reconceived Psychology of Personality.James T. Lamiell - 1991 - Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology 11 (1):11-23.