Philosophy or Auto-Anthropology?

Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 56 (2):26-28 (2019)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Timothy Williamson is mainly right, I think. He defends armchair philosophy as a variety of armchair science, like mathematics, or computer modeling in evolutionary theory, economics, statistics, and I agree that this is precisely what philosophy is, at its best: working out the assumptions and implications of any serious body of thought, helping everyone formulate the best questions to ask, and then leaving the empirical work to the other sciences. Philosophy – at its best – is to other inquiries roughly as theoretical physics is to experimental physics. You can do it in the armchair, but you need to know a lot about the phenomena with which the inquiry deals.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 100,809

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

Armchair Philosophy.Timothy Williamson - 2019 - Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 56 (2):19 - 25.
Armchair Science and Armchair Philosophy.Anton V. Kuznetsov - 2019 - Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 56 (2):43-45.
Metaphilosophy: History and Perspectives.Vadim V. Vasilyev - 2019 - Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 56 (2):6-18.
Naturalism.Timothy Williamson - 2007 - In The Philosophy of Philosophy. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 467–496.
Normative Ethics: an Armchair Discipline?Johnnie R. R. Pedersen - 2019 - Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 56 (2):151-166.

Analytics

Added to PP
2020-02-07

Downloads
99 (#212,869)

6 months
12 (#290,681)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Daniel C. Dennett
Tufts University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references