IF 0.3 4区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY
K. Werner
{"title":"Pan Cogito wypełnia kwestionariusz. Filozofia eksperymentalna wobec pytania o naturę kompetencji filozoficznej","authors":"K. Werner","doi":"10.14394/FILNAU.2019.0012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The project of experimental philosophy rests on the assumption that comparing the philosophical views held by professional philosophers with the views of non-philosophers is logically correct and philosophically plausible. There are at least three components of this assumption. First, experimental philosophers are committed to the institutional account of philosophical competence: a person counts as a philosopher if they have graduated in philosophy or at least attended philosophy lectures. Second, experimental philosophers assume that some words from everyday vocabulary automatically refer to certain philosophical problems. Third, experimental philosophy fails to distinguish between de re and de dicto philosophical beliefs. I propose harking back to an approach to philosophical competence that portrays it as a kind of self-knowledge (the recognition of one’s epistemic position, similar to what Husserl referred to as bracketing of the natural attitude). In this light, I offer some new prospects for experimental philosophy.","PeriodicalId":41424,"journal":{"name":"Filozofia Nauki","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Filozofia Nauki","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14394/FILNAU.2019.0012","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

实验哲学项目建立在这样一个假设之上,即将专业哲学家的哲学观点与非哲学家的观点进行比较在逻辑上是正确的,在哲学上是合理的。这个假设至少有三个组成部分。首先,实验哲学家致力于对哲学能力的制度解释:如果一个人毕业于哲学或至少参加过哲学讲座,他就被视为哲学家。其次,实验哲学家认为,日常词汇中的一些单词会自动指代某些哲学问题。第三,实验哲学未能区分de re和de dicto哲学信仰。我建议回到一种哲学能力的方法,将其描述为一种自我认识(对一个人的认识立场的承认,类似于胡塞尔所说的自然态度的包围)。有鉴于此,我为实验哲学提供了一些新的前景。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Pan Cogito wypełnia kwestionariusz. Filozofia eksperymentalna wobec pytania o naturę kompetencji filozoficznej
The project of experimental philosophy rests on the assumption that comparing the philosophical views held by professional philosophers with the views of non-philosophers is logically correct and philosophically plausible. There are at least three components of this assumption. First, experimental philosophers are committed to the institutional account of philosophical competence: a person counts as a philosopher if they have graduated in philosophy or at least attended philosophy lectures. Second, experimental philosophers assume that some words from everyday vocabulary automatically refer to certain philosophical problems. Third, experimental philosophy fails to distinguish between de re and de dicto philosophical beliefs. I propose harking back to an approach to philosophical competence that portrays it as a kind of self-knowledge (the recognition of one’s epistemic position, similar to what Husserl referred to as bracketing of the natural attitude). In this light, I offer some new prospects for experimental philosophy.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Filozofia Nauki
Filozofia Nauki PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Filozofia Nauki (The Philosophy of Science) is a double-blind peer-reviewed academic quarterly published by the Institute of Philosophy, University of Warsaw. It publishes articles, notes, and reviews covering the whole range of analytic philosophy, including among others: epistemology, ontology, general philosophy of science, philosophy of physics, philosophy of biology, philosophy of mathematics, philosophical logic, philosophy of language, philosophy of action, philosophy of mind, cognitive sciences, experimental philosophy. We invite papers not only from professional philosophers but also from specialists in different areas, interested in generalizing their scientific experiences towards more foundational issues.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信