دانلود کتاب دفاع از فلسفه – صندلی‌های راحتی، آزمایش‌ها و دلیلی برای اصلاحات روش‌شناختی

This book is a defense of analytic philosophy. It is also a defense of experimental philosophy. In fact, it is a defense of the one in no small part by also being a defense of the other. This might seem odd since the two are often thought to be deeply at odds with one another; so much so, in fact, that it is rather common nowadays to think that experimental philosophers must think that something is terribly wrong with analytic philosophy and that analytic philosophers must think that something is terribly wrong with experimental philosophy. In this spirit, Timothy Williamson (2010) famously wrote in the New York Times: There are philosophy- hating philosophers who would like to replace the traditional methodology of philosophy, with their stress on a combination of abstract reasoning and particular examples, by something more like imitation psychology. Without even properly defining what it is they are attacking, they use experimental results in a selective and unscientific spirit to try to discredit the traditional methodology. While Williamson has softened his view of experimental philosophy since then, this way of thinking about the relationship between experimental philosophy and analytic philosophy is still held widely throughout the profession, and our goal is to show, once and for all, that this way of thinking about the relationship between analytic philosophy and experimental philosophy is deeply mistaken.1 In order to do this, we need to explain the relationship between analytic philosophy and experimental philosophy, including the reasons why experimental philosophy is a species of analytic philosophy and the reasons why some philosophers have sometimes thought that it is not. It turns out that what many philosophers think about the relationship between the two depends on the kind of framework that is often used to describe whatever perceived metaphilosophical differences and disagreements there are between them, and so one of our central goals in this book will be to develop and advance a new framework for thinking about them.2 In order to do this, like any record that needs to be set straight, we need to begin at the beginning and so that is where we will start.