{"title":"Précis of Unsettled Thoughts. A Theory of Degrees of Rationality and Replies to Commentators","authors":"Julia Staffel","doi":"10.1007/s44204-025-00308-5","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s44204-025-00308-5","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This précis summarizes the main arguments from my book “Unsettled Thoughts. A Theory of Degrees of Rationality.” In my replies to commentators, I explain how the Bayesian framework can deal with evidential situations that are not covered by its standard assumptions, and how this impacts the approximation framework I develop in “Unsettled Thoughts.”</p></div>","PeriodicalId":93890,"journal":{"name":"Asian journal of philosophy","volume":"4 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s44204-025-00308-5.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145162911","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Illusions of memory: what referential confabulation can tell us about remembering","authors":"James Openshaw","doi":"10.1007/s44204-025-00305-8","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s44204-025-00305-8","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Recent philosophy of memory tends to treat confabulation as a distinctive type of representational error, marked by reference failure, often via direct analogy with the traditional conception of sensory hallucination. I argue that this model misrepresents the phenomenon. Drawing on the empirical possibility of referential confabulation—wherein confabulators mnemically refer to events in their past—I argue that mnemic reference and genuine remembering come apart. This, in particular, challenges causalist theories for which one element—appropriate causation—purports to secure reference and to separate genuine remembering from confabulation. Acknowledging referential confabulation requires causalists to complicate their story in a way that has implications on what remembering is. More generally, referential confabulation prompts a broader rethinking of memory error debates. Rather than being a distinctive type of content-level error, confabulation is better characterised as a processing malfunction: a breakdown in strategic retrieval and monitoring, but not necessarily in referential success. Appreciating this calls us to aim at a more nuanced conception of remembering and its frailties.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":93890,"journal":{"name":"Asian journal of philosophy","volume":"4 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145168669","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Memory as the origin of the past: a developmental and conceptual refinement of the dependency thesis","authors":"Yasushi Hirai","doi":"10.1007/s44204-025-00306-7","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s44204-025-00306-7","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This paper aims to refine the dependency thesis, which posits that episodic memory is necessary for acquiring the concept of pastness. By incorporating the hybrid concept thesis, which holds that pastness involves an irreducible experiential component, and the communicability constraint, which states that such experiential content cannot be acquired purely through linguistic or inferential means, this paper argues that pastness cannot be fully explained by relational properties alone. Developmental psychological evidence suggests that temporal cognition progresses in stages, with an early categorical sense of pastness emerging before the ability to structure time sequentially. At this early stage, individuals lack the capacity for time-place indexing, which reinforces the need for direct experiential access in forming the concept of the past. This structured framework clarifies why empirical objections—such as amnesia cases used to challenge the necessity of episodic memory—fail to undermine the dependency thesis. While patients with episodic memory loss retain some relational understanding of time, their concept of pastness remains indirectly dependent on the episodic memory of others. Similarly, critiques arguing that episodic memory is not sufficient for past concept formation conflate different stages of cognitive development, overlooking the necessity of early direct experiential awareness. By integrating philosophical and psychological insights, this paper provides a structured argument for the specific way in which episodic memory contributes to our understanding of time.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":93890,"journal":{"name":"Asian journal of philosophy","volume":"4 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145168403","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Bird’s Knowing Science: on cases of scientific progress","authors":"Maren Bräutigam","doi":"10.1007/s44204-025-00304-9","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s44204-025-00304-9","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In his recent book <i>Knowing Science</i>, Alexander Bird argues that scientific progress is to be understood in terms of the accumulation of knowledge (CK). To this end, he employs the method of conceptual analysis; i.e., he considers several (actual or hypothetical) cases and argues that CK does the best job in capturing our intuitions concerning the applicability of the concept ‘scientific progress’. In this review, I argue that the cases which Bird considers are not fully adequate for the sake at hand, because they describe progress towards science rather than progress within science (which I take the concept of scientific progress to be all about).</p></div>","PeriodicalId":93890,"journal":{"name":"Asian journal of philosophy","volume":"4 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s44204-025-00304-9.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145167969","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Responses to criticisms","authors":"Yafeng Shan, Jon Williamson","doi":"10.1007/s44204-025-00302-x","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s44204-025-00302-x","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Responding to the critical commentaries by Rosa Runhardt, Erik Weber, and Michael Wilde, we defend the application of Evidential Pluralism to the social sciences.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":93890,"journal":{"name":"Asian journal of philosophy","volume":"4 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12279585/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144700660","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Response to critics","authors":"Alan Richardson","doi":"10.1007/s44204-025-00303-w","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s44204-025-00303-w","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In these replies, I respond to critics of my <i>Logical Empiricism as Scientific Philosophy</i>, Cambridge University Press, 2023.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":93890,"journal":{"name":"Asian journal of philosophy","volume":"4 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145165051","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Unless we have faces: love, evaluation, and nonresistant nonbelief","authors":"Benny Mattis","doi":"10.1007/s44204-025-00298-4","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s44204-025-00298-4","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This paper presents a theistic reply to J. L. Schellenberg’s Hiddenness Argument, which frames the existence of “nonresistant nonbelief”—that is, lack of belief in God which is not due to any resistance on the part of the nonbeliever—as evidence against theism. After reviewing some previous theistic responses to the Hiddenness Argument, I elaborate and build upon Schellenberg’s philosophical methodology, particularly emphasizing a distinction between divine loving and divine valuing. Loving is properly directed toward actual persons as such and presupposes the existence of the beloved, but valuing is properly directed toward possible persons as such and chooses the existence of the beloved. Building on this distinction, I argue that God would value and therefore create persons such as those who exist in our actual world, including nonresistant nonbelievers (i.e., persons who exist in a state of nonresistant nonbelief at some point during the course of their lives). My reasoning is based on the notion that most persons who exist in our actual world are properly valuable; we may discover their value by way of human experience, but God would value such persons even prior to their existence. After formulating an objection to the Hiddenness Argument and a counter-argument in favor of theism, I close with another review of prior literature, explaining how this paper’s reasoning overcomes some of the problems faced by previous theistic responses to the Hiddenness Argument.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":93890,"journal":{"name":"Asian journal of philosophy","volume":"4 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s44204-025-00298-4.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145165307","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Precis of Evidential Pluralism in the Social Sciences","authors":"Yafeng Shan, Jon Williamson","doi":"10.1007/s44204-025-00301-y","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s44204-025-00301-y","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Evidential Pluralism is an emerging philosophical theory of how to establish and evaluate causal claims. Shan & Williamson (2023) apply Evidential Pluralism across the social sciences. This article provides a concise overview of the book.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":93890,"journal":{"name":"Asian journal of philosophy","volume":"4 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12246018/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144628066","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Physical nature lives! Naturalism facing scientism and the continental phenomenological tradition","authors":"Lok-Chi Chan, Kuei-Chen Chen","doi":"10.1007/s44204-025-00295-7","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s44204-025-00295-7","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In this lead article for an article symposium, we investigate the possible intersection between metaphysical naturalism and the phenomenological tradition. Our guiding hypothesis is that nature constitutes phenomenology, whereas phenomenology constitutes our access to nature. Pace renowned phenomenologists Gallagher and Zahavi’s call to replace “classic naturalism” with “non-classic conceptions,” we reconstruct “classic naturalism” by drawing on the seminal works of Armstrong, Lewis, Jackson, Braddon-Mitchell, Ney, and others. On this basis, we argue against the common assertion that metaphysical naturalism entails scientism and methodological naturalism and demonstrate their theoretical incompatibility, and thereby contend that a properly characterized classic naturalism could, in fact, accommodate phenomenological approaches. Then, we revise contemporary phenomenologists’ notions of “mutual constraints” and “mutual enlightenment” and reframe the subtle intersection between phenomenology and the naturalistic perspective. Finally, we address standard phenomenological criticisms of naturalism, which appeal to the primacy of the experiential perspective, and explore how the perspective can, in fact, accommodate and critically inform naturalism’s core theoretical commitments. This two-way discussion, which is grounded in both traditions, results in a phenomenology-friendly naturalism and a naturalism-friendly phenomenology that critically complement one another.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":93890,"journal":{"name":"Asian journal of philosophy","volume":"4 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s44204-025-00295-7.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145163030","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Skeptical doubt, principal bases, and heuristics and rational norms","authors":"Jonathan Ichikawa","doi":"10.1007/s44204-025-00299-3","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s44204-025-00299-3","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>A critical dicussion of Ángel Pinillos’s (2023) <i>Why We Doubt</i>, focusing on questions about delineating the boundaries of skeptical doubt, the nature of evidence and its connections to sensitivity conditions, specifying principal bases for beliefs, and the connections Pinillos posits between skeptical intuitions and Bayesian norms.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":93890,"journal":{"name":"Asian journal of philosophy","volume":"4 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145160566","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}