• Complain

William G. Lycan - On Evidence in Philosophy

Here you can read online William G. Lycan - On Evidence in Philosophy full text of the book (entire story) in english for free. Download pdf and epub, get meaning, cover and reviews about this ebook. year: 2019, publisher: Oxford University Press, USA, genre: Science. Description of the work, (preface) as well as reviews are available. Best literature library LitArk.com created for fans of good reading and offers a wide selection of genres:

Romance novel Science fiction Adventure Detective Science History Home and family Prose Art Politics Computer Non-fiction Religion Business Children Humor

Choose a favorite category and find really read worthwhile books. Enjoy immersion in the world of imagination, feel the emotions of the characters or learn something new for yourself, make an fascinating discovery.

William G. Lycan On Evidence in Philosophy
  • Book:
    On Evidence in Philosophy
  • Author:
  • Publisher:
    Oxford University Press, USA
  • Genre:
  • Year:
    2019
  • Rating:
    5 / 5
  • Favourites:
    Add to favourites
  • Your mark:
    • 100
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5

On Evidence in Philosophy: summary, description and annotation

We offer to read an annotation, description, summary or preface (depends on what the author of the book "On Evidence in Philosophy" wrote himself). If you haven't found the necessary information about the book — write in the comments, we will try to find it.

In this book William G. Lycan offers an epistemology of philosophy itself, a partial method for philosophical inquiry. The epistemology features three ultimate sources of justified philosophical belief. First, common sense, in a carefully restricted sense of the term-the sorts of contingent propositions Moore defended against idealists and skeptics. Second, the deliverances of well confirmed science. Third and more fundamentally, intuitions about cases in a carefully specified sense of that term.The first half of On Evidence in Philosophy expounds a version of Moores method and applies it to each of several issues. This version is shown to resist all the standard objections to Moore; most of them do not even apply. It is argued, in Chapters 5 and 6, that philosophical method is far less powerful than most have taken it to be. In particular, deductive argument can accomplish very little, and hardly ever is an opposing position refuted except by common sense or by science. The final two chapters defend the evidential status of intuitions and the Goodmanian method of reflective equilibrium; it is argued that philosophy always and everywhere depends on them. The method is then set within a more general explanatory-coherentist epistemology, which is shown to resist standard forms of skepticism.In sum, William G. Lycan advocates a picture of philosophy as a very wide explanatory reflective equilibrium incorporating common sense, science, and our firmest intuitions on any topic-and nothing more, not ever.

William G. Lycan: author's other books


Who wrote On Evidence in Philosophy? Find out the surname, the name of the author of the book and a list of all author's works by series.

On Evidence in Philosophy — read online for free the complete book (whole text) full work

Below is the text of the book, divided by pages. System saving the place of the last page read, allows you to conveniently read the book "On Evidence in Philosophy" online for free, without having to search again every time where you left off. Put a bookmark, and you can go to the page where you finished reading at any time.

Light

Font size:

Reset

Interval:

Bookmark:

Make
On Evidence in Philosophy - image 1
On Evidence in Philosophy

On Evidence in Philosophy - image 2

Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX2 6DP, United Kingdom

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the Universitys objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries

William G. Lycan 2019

The moral rights of the author have been asserted

First Edition published in 2019

Impression: 1

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, by licence or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the address above

You must not circulate this work in any other form and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer

Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press 198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

Data available

Library of Congress Control Number: 2018955014

ISBN 9780198829720

ebook ISBN 9780192565266

Printed and bound in Great Britain by Clays Ltd, Elcograf S.p.A.

Links to third party websites are provided by Oxford in good faith and for information only. Oxford disclaims any responsibility for the materials contained in any third party website referenced in this work.

To the memories of two great friends, Jay Rosenberg (19422008) and David Armstrong (19262014), one of whom would strongly have approved of most that is said in this book.

Contents

Much of the material here has previously appeared in print, but this book is not a collection of papers. The papers that are largely reprinted from earlier venues () were written to become part of the book.

For helpful comments and exchanges, warm thanks to: David Armstrong, Annette Baier, Heather Battaly, George Bealer, David Christensen, Earl Conee, Tim Crane, Chris Daly, Michael Devitt, Nick Georgalis, Alvin Goldman, Gary Gutting, Gil Harman, Frank Jackson, Michael Lynch, Ausonio Marras, Andrew Melnyk, Charles Pigden, Jim Pryor, Bill Robinson, Bill Roche, Jay Rosenberg, Bruce Russell, Ernie Sosa, Kim Sterelny, Steve Stich, Casey Swank, Jim Tomberlin, Peter van Inwagen, Fritz Warfield, James Willoughby, and certainly others whose communications I have neglected to record.

I am also grateful to each of three OUP reviewers, whose reports on an early draft have greatly increased the coherence of my presentation. One remains anonymous, one is Anthony Booth, and the third is David Henderson, whose extensive comments on two drafts have led to important corrections and other improvements.

Part of the Introduction was part of my John Dewey Lecture at the Eastern Division meeting of the APA, January, 2017; the lecture has since appeared, under the prescient title On Evidence in Philosophy, in the Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association, vol. 91 (2017): 10217.

is based primarily on Moores Antiskeptical Strategies, in S. Nuccetelli and G. Seay (eds.), Themes from G.E. Moore: New Essays in Epistemology and Ethics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007): 8499. Reprinted by permission of Oxford University Press.

is largely excerpted from Moore Against the New Skeptics, Philosophical Studies 103 (2001): 3553.

is a revised version of A Particularly Compelling Refutation of Eliminative Materialism, in D.M. Johnson and C.E. Erneling (eds.), Mind as a Scientific Object: Between Brain and Culture (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005): 197205. Reprinted by permission of Oxford University Press.

is an expanded version of Free Will and the Burden of Proof, in Anthony OHear (ed.), Minds and Persons (Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement: 53, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003): 10722.

Much of is excerpted from Giving Dualism its Due, Australasian Journal of Philosophy 87 (2009): 55163.

Some paragraphs in are lifted from On Two Main Themes in Guttings What Philosophers Know, Southern Journal of Philosophy 51 (2013): 11220, and one from Bealer on the Possibility of Philosophical Knowledge, Philosophical Studies 81 (1996): 14350.

is based on Epistemology and the Role of Intuitions, in S. Bernecker and D. Pritchard (eds.), The Routledge Companion to Epistemology (London: Routledge, 2011): 81322.

contains a few paragraphs from Explanationist Rebuttals (Coherentism Defended Again), Southern Journal of Philosophy 50 (2012): 520.

My title is a pun, as between (a) what philosophers may use as evidence for theories and (b) what sorts of things philosophers may consider to be evident. Each of those is a central topic of this book.

I shall sketch an epistemology of philosophy itself, a partial method for philosophical inquiry. No element of it is original with me, but I do not think it has ever before been put together in the way I will do here.

What are the ultimate sources of justified philosophical belief?

First, common sense, in a carefully restricted sense of the termthe sorts of contingent propositions Moore defended against idealists and skeptics: Here is one hand; I had my breakfast before I had lunch; Right now I am standing up and talking to a roomful of people. In apply my particular version of Moores technique to each of two philosophical issues on which Moore has not previously been brought to bear: eliminativism in the philosophy of mind, and the free-will debate.

It must be emphasized that every Mooreancommonsensical belief is defeasible. Any of them might be refuted in context by some combination of reasons. I have said they are evidence, not that they are infallible. To call them evidence is controversial enough and requires considerable argument.

Our second source of justified philosophical belief is the deliverances of current science, particularly the hard physical and basic biological sciencesat least, whatever is well confirmed and fairly uncontroversial within the relevant field.

In any area of philosophy of mind, for example, the theorist should take the relevant scientific findings very seriously, even when those results do not legislate. Here are a number of claims that have been made about pain during the past fifty yearsmade a priori, or perhaps on the basis of introspection alone: that pain is self-intimating (i.e., if one has a pain one is necessarily and perhaps eo ipso aware of it); that ones belief that one is in pain is infallible and/or incorrigible; that pain is intrinsically unpleasant and necessarily motivates attempts to relieve it; that at least some pain is simple in that it does not have psychological components. Not one of those claims has been confirmed by empirical research on pain; each, though logically consistent with that research, is implausible in light of it.

But what is so great, or even tolerable, about common sense and science considered as evidence in philosophy? Each of them is conspicuously empirical, when philosophy itself is not empirical except possibly in the Quinean way that everything is, and especially when in each case there is a long tradition of rejection, skepticism, and at least questioning by philosophers far more talented and distinguished than I. In defense, I adopt Armstrongs (1973) test for the efficacy of an epistemic method: as a sign or mark of probity, we should judge a method by

Next page
Light

Font size:

Reset

Interval:

Bookmark:

Make

Similar books «On Evidence in Philosophy»

Look at similar books to On Evidence in Philosophy. We have selected literature similar in name and meaning in the hope of providing readers with more options to find new, interesting, not yet read works.


Reviews about «On Evidence in Philosophy»

Discussion, reviews of the book On Evidence in Philosophy and just readers' own opinions. Leave your comments, write what you think about the work, its meaning or the main characters. Specify what exactly you liked and what you didn't like, and why you think so.