Practices Make Perfect: On Minding Methodology When Mooting Metaphilosophy

This chapter argues that debates over philosophical methodology would be well-served by a greater attention to the specifics of philosophical practice. Intuition deniers such as Max Deutsch and Herman Cappelen have claimed that philosophers do not generally rely on intuitions, but simply make arguments, perhaps elliptical ones. Their claims turn out to be inconsistent with, for example, the sorts of dialectical moves that are licensed in philosophical practice when mooting a case; and with much of the historical evidence about the reception of Gettier’s classic paper. Others, like Joshua Knobe, have argued that intuitions are so stable and uniform that a proper reading of the empirical evidence indicates that no methodological concerns should arise. Yet such arguments do not adequately consider just how much current philosophical practices, especially inferential practices, are susceptible to even fairly modest sources of error.