International Undergraduate Philosophy Conference

Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://scholarworks.montana.edu/handle/1/2922

The Undergraduate Scholars Program, Phi Sigma Tau, the Philosophy Society, and the Department of History and Philosophy held the first International Undergraduate Philosophy Conference at Montana State University. Undergraduate students from across the globe convened in Bozeman September 6-7, 2013 for a philosophical discourse on a variety of topics, including Hegel and voting, human nature and moral responsibility, as well as Kant and the problem of other minds. Dr. Ian Schnee, Western Kentucky University, delivered the conference’s keynote address on “Knowledge, Falsehood, and Gettier Cases”. Submissions were juried by a panel of peers.

Browse

Filters

20131

Settings

Author: search.filters.author.Zhao, HelenHas files: Yes

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    A Defense of Epistemic Intuitions
    (2013-09) Zhao, Helen
    Since the very beginning, intuitions have played a crucial role in philosophical inquiry. When Socrates asks, “What is justice?” he appeals to an innate source of knowledge that inexplicably recognizes examples of justice, even those falling outside the constraints of a definition. Intuition, as this purportedly omniscient source has been deemed, appears not only to exist universally among people, but also to hold some sort of special weight in the evaluation of normative claims—i.e. what the definition of justice should be. Likewise, epistemology in the analytic tradition employs intuitions in its conceptual analysis of knowledge. However, recent work in experimental philosophy, an emerging field that impresses the necessity of empirical data, threatens to overturn the foundations of traditional philosophy by proposing the unreliability of intuitions. According to data gathered by Weinberg, Nichols, and Stich in their paper “Normativity and Epistemic Intuitions,” intuitions are not universal and subject to 1) cultural variation, 2) socioeconomic variation, 3) previous philosophical exposure, and 4) the order in which cases are presented—that is, they are dependent on situational factors. Therefore, intuitions cannot be trusted to make normative epistemic claims. However, I plan to counter Weinberg, Nichols, and Stich by referencing the transparency of intuitions, proposed by Frank Jackson in his paper “On Gettier Holdouts,” in order to reconstruct an understanding of intuition that does not threaten epistemology in the analytic tradition and, furthermore, can be reconciled with experimental philosophy. First, I will deconstruct Weinberg et al.’s argument that intuitions fail to satisfy the Normative Project—the division of epistemology dedicated to understanding how knowledge should be understood—through their discussion of how intuitions vary. Second, I will explain Jackson’s notions of transparent intuitions, representational structures, and the “intuition module.” The last sections of this paper will be dedicated to responding to Weinberg et al. and exploring the implications of experimental philosophy on the Descriptive and Normative Projects of epistemology.
Copyright (c) 2002-2022, LYRASIS. All rights reserved.