Empirical Philosophy and Experimental Philosophy

Abstract

Abstract There seems to be a methodological revolution taking place in philosophy. In some corners of the field, it’s business as usual, but in others, philosophers have become resolutely impure: integrating lessons from various branches of psychology (cognitive, developmental, social, and cross-cultural), neuroscience (cognitive, molecular, and clinical), evolutionary theory, experimental economics, and other “scientific” fields. The trend has been especially widespread in philosophy of mind and moral philosophy, but methodological perturbations can be felt in other areas as well. To use a trite metaphor, philosophers have been rolling up their sleeves and getting their hands dirty. The latest development in this trend takes this slogan even more seriously. Rather than just reporting scientific findings, philosophers are contributing to science by designing and conducting experiments. As with any revolution, it can be a bit hard to make sense of what’s happening while the battles are still taking place. In this chapter, I will attempt to describe and defend some of the methodological changes. I will distinguish two different approaches, which I will call experimental and empirical philosophy respectively. I will also argue that neither approach can function without some armchair methods, and neither collapses into psychology. The borders in this area are blurry, but even rough distinctions can help expose a methodological division of labor. Like many divisions of labor, the different methods I will discuss are best construed as components of a collective process rather than isolated intellectual fiefdoms.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 63 citations exist upstream.