Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift/Konferencebidrag i tidsskrift /Bidrag til avis › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › peer review
Are thought experiments “disturbing”? The case of armchair physics. / Schindler, Samuel; Saint-Germier, Pierre.
I: Philosophical Studies, 2019.Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift/Konferencebidrag i tidsskrift /Bidrag til avis › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › peer review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Are thought experiments “disturbing”? The case of armchair physics
AU - Schindler, Samuel
AU - Saint-Germier, Pierre
PY - 2019
Y1 - 2019
N2 - Proponents of the “negative program” in experimental philosophy have argued that judgements in philosophical cases, also known as case judgements, are unreliable and that the method of cases should be either strongly constrained or even abandoned. Here we put one of the main proponent’s account of why philosophical cases may cause the unreliability of case judgements to the test. We conducted our test with thought experiments from physics, which exhibit the exact same supposedly “disturbing characteristics” of philosophical cases.
AB - Proponents of the “negative program” in experimental philosophy have argued that judgements in philosophical cases, also known as case judgements, are unreliable and that the method of cases should be either strongly constrained or even abandoned. Here we put one of the main proponent’s account of why philosophical cases may cause the unreliability of case judgements to the test. We conducted our test with thought experiments from physics, which exhibit the exact same supposedly “disturbing characteristics” of philosophical cases.
KW - Armchair physics
KW - Disturbing characteristics
KW - Experimental philosophy
KW - Machery
KW - Method of cases
KW - Thought experiments
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85071464463&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s11098-019-01333-w
DO - 10.1007/s11098-019-01333-w
M3 - Journal article
JO - Philosophical Studies
JF - Philosophical Studies
SN - 0031-8116
ER -