Philosophical intuitions and psychological theory

Ethics 108 (2):367-385 (1998)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

To what extent can philosophical thought experiments reveal norms? Some ethicists have argued that certain thought experiments reveal that people draw a morally significant distinction between "doing" and "allowing". I examine one such thought experiment in detail and argue that the intuitions it elicits can be explained by "prospect theory", a psychological theory about the way people reason. The extent to which such alternative explanations of the results of thought experiments in philosophy are generally available is an empirical question

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,349

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

A defense of intuitions.S. Matthew Liao - 2008 - Philosophical Studies 140 (2):247 - 262.
Intuitions as evidence.Joel Pust - 2000 - New York: Garland.
Psychology and the Use of Intuitions in Philosophy.Brian Talbot - 2009 - Studia Philosophica Estonica 2 (2):157-176.
What good are counterexamples?Brian Weatherson - 2003 - Philosophical Studies 115 (1):1-31.
The Role of Theory Contamination in Intuitions.James McBain - 1999 - Southwest Philosophy Review 15 (1):197-204.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
346 (#55,955)

6 months
27 (#107,707)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

What good are counterexamples?Brian Weatherson - 2003 - Philosophical Studies 115 (1):1-31.
Intuition.Joel Pust - 2017 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

View all 49 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references