Boston Studies in the Philosophy and History of Science, 2019
This chapter argues for the centrality of Neurath’s syntacticism to his physicalism, encyclopedis... more This chapter argues for the centrality of Neurath’s syntacticism to his physicalism, encyclopedism, and the unity of science program. I defend the intelligibility of Neurath’s opposition to semantics and underline the role syntacticism plays in his anti-metaphysical empiricism. I argue that Neurath was correct to fear that the semantic turn would spell the end of logical empiricism. Many of the most influential metaphysical arguments of the twentieth century turn on premises that would be undermined by a Neurathian rejection of semantics.
This paper introduces the concept of linguistic hijacking, the phenomenon wherein politically sig... more This paper introduces the concept of linguistic hijacking, the phenomenon wherein politically significant terminology is co-opted by dominant groups in ways that further their dominance over marginalized groups. Here I focus on hijackings of the words “racist” and “racism.” The model of linguistic hijacking developed here, called the semantic corruption model, is inspired by Burge’s social externalism, in which deference plays a key role in determining the semantic properties of expressions. The model describes networks of deference relations, which support competing meanings of, for example, “racist,” and postulates the existence of deference magnets that influence those networks over time. Linguistic hijacking functions to shift the semantic properties of crucial political terminology by causing changes in deference networks, spreading semantics that serve the interests of dominant groups, and weakening the influence of resistant deference networks. I consider an objection allegin...
Do psychological traits predict philosophical views? We administered the PhilPapers Survey, creat... more Do psychological traits predict philosophical views? We administered the PhilPapers Survey, created by David Bourget and David Chalmers, which consists of 30 views on central philosophical topics (e.g., epistemology, ethics, metaphysics , philosophy of mind, and philosophy of language) to a sample of professional philosophers (N = 314). We extended the PhilPapers survey to measure a number of psychological traits, such as personality, numeracy, well-being, lifestyle, and life experiences. We also included non-technical 'translations' of these views for eventual use in other populations. We found limited to no support for the notion that personality or demographics predict philosophical views. We did, however, find that some psychological traits were predictive of philosophical views, even after strict correction for multiple comparisons. Findings include: higher interest in numeracy predicted physicalism, naturalism, and consequentialism; lower levels of well-being and higher levels of mental illness predicted hard determinism; using substances such as psychedelics and marijuana predicted non-realist and subjectivist views of morality and aesthetics; having had a transformative or self-transcendent experience predicted theism and idealism. We discuss whether or not these empirical results have philosophical implications, while noting that 68% of our sample of professional philosophers indicated that such findings would indeed have philosophical value.
Third-order exclusion is a form of epistemic oppression in which the epistemic lifeway of a domin... more Third-order exclusion is a form of epistemic oppression in which the epistemic lifeway of a dominant group disrupts the epistemic agency of members of marginalized groups. In this paper we apply situated perspectives in order to argue that philosophy as a discipline imposes third-order exclusions on members of marginalized groups who are interested in participating in philosophy. We examine a number of specific aspects of the epistemic lifeway embodied by academic philosophy and show how this produces inaccessibility to the discipline. In addition to critiquing the discipline and its methods we also use this discussion to elaborate on third-order exclusion itself. We conclude by proposing an intersectional pedagogy as a step toward creating a more accessible discipline.
The debate over safe spaces has traditionally been cast as a conflict between competing goals. On... more The debate over safe spaces has traditionally been cast as a conflict between competing goals. On the one hand we have epistemic goals such as the pursuit of truth and the free exchange of ideas. On the other we have social, political, and ethical goals centered on protecting marginalized students from emotional and psychological trauma. Even proponents of safe space initiatives will often distinguish them from brave spaces, where brave spaces aim at truth as opposed to safety. Using concepts drawn from recent literature in social epistemology, this essay reframes the debate by developing a new epistemological conception of safe spaces. On this conception, the purpose of safe space initiatives is to safeguard marginalized students and colleagues against epistemic oppression and epistemic injustice and to promote recognition of situated knowledge, thereby promoting the pursuit of truth and the free exchange of ideas. These goals demonstrably align with the practices employed within traditional safe space initiatives, but also suggest new directives for creating and sustaining safe spaces that are explicitly aimed at combatting the effects of epistemic oppression. I show how this conception helps to defuse some of the traditional objections to creating safe spaces within academic settings.
This paper introduces the concept of linguistic hijacking, the phenomenon wherein politically sig... more This paper introduces the concept of linguistic hijacking, the phenomenon wherein politically significant terminology is co-opted by dominant groups in ways that further their dominance over marginalized groups. Here I focus on hijackings of the words "racist" and "racism." The model of linguistic hijacking developed here, called the semantic corruption model, is inspired by Burge's social externalism, in which deference plays a key role in determining the semantic properties of expressions. The model describes networks of deference relations, which support competing meanings of, for example, "racist," and postulates the existence of deference magnets that influence those networks over time. Linguistic hijacking functions to shift the semantic properties of crucial political terminology by causing changes in deference networks, spreading semantics that serve the interests of dominant groups, and weakening the influence of resistant deference networks. I consider an objection alleging the semantic corruption model gets the semantic data wrong because it entails those who hijack terms like "racist" speak truly, whereas it's natural to see such hijacking misuses as false speech about racism. I then respond to this objection by invoking the framework of metalinguistic negotiation proposed by Plunkett and Sundell.
This chapter argues for the centrality of Neurath's syntacticism to his physicalism, encyclopedis... more This chapter argues for the centrality of Neurath's syntacticism to his physicalism, encyclopedism, and the unity of science program. I defend the intelligibility of Neurath's opposition to semantics and underline the role syntacticism plays in his anti-metaphysical empiricism. I argue that Neurath was correct to fear that the semantic turn would spell the end of logical empiricism. Many of the most influential metaphysical arguments of the 20 th century turn on premises that would be undermined by a Neurathian rejection of semantics.
This paper replies to criticism of Anderson (2017), arguing that, as an aspect of structural epis... more This paper replies to criticism of Anderson (2017), arguing that, as an aspect of structural epistemic oppression, there is no causal criteria for conceptual competence injustice. The paper articulates important differences between conceptual competence injustice and Fricker's notion of testimonial injustice and argues for the explanatory significance of the former.
This paper identifies the phenomenon of conceptual competence injustice, a form of epistemic inju... more This paper identifies the phenomenon of conceptual competence injustice, a form of epistemic injustice that occurs when a marginalized epistemic agent makes a conceptual claim and is illegitimately regarded as having failed to grasp one or more of the concepts expressed in her testimony. The notion of a conceptual claim is given a deflationary account that is coextensive with the class of a priori knowable claims. This study reveals a form of oppression that severely hinders marginalized epistemic agents who seek to create or communicate conceptual knowledge. Conceptual competence injustice is compared and contrasted with three other forms of epistemic injustice: testimonial injustice, hermeneutical injustice, and contributory injustice. The final section investigates a number of damaging effects that conceptual competence injustice has on marginalized persons pursuing a career in academic philosophy.
Third-order exclusion is a form of epistemic oppression in which the epistemic lifeway of a domin... more Third-order exclusion is a form of epistemic oppression in which the epistemic lifeway of a dominant group disrupts the epistemic agency of members of marginalized groups. In this paper we apply situated perspectives in order to argue that philosophy as a discipline imposes third-order exclusions on members of marginalized groups who are interested in participating in philosophy. We examine a number of specific aspects of the epistemic lifeway embodied by academic philosophy and show how this produces inaccessibility to the discipline. In addition to critiquing the discipline and its methods we also use this discussion to elaborate on third-order exclusion itself. We conclude by proposing an intersectional pedagogy as a step toward creating a more accessible discipline.
ABSTRACT Do psychological traits predict philosophical views? We administered the PhilPapers Surv... more ABSTRACT Do psychological traits predict philosophical views? We administered the PhilPapers Survey, created by David Bourget and David Chalmers, which consists of 30 views on central philosophical topics (e.g., epistemology, ethics, metaphysics, philosophy of mind, and philosophy of language) to a sample of professional philosophers (N = 314). We extended the PhilPapers survey to measure a number of psychological traits, such as personality, numeracy, well-being, lifestyle, and life experiences. We also included non-technical ‘translations’ of these views for eventual use in other populations. We found limited to no support for the notion that personality or demographics predict philosophical views. We did, however, find that some psychological traits were predictive of philosophical views, even after strict correction for multiple comparisons. Findings include: higher interest in numeracy predicted physicalism, naturalism, and consequentialism; lower levels of well-being and higher levels of mental illness predicted hard determinism; using substances such as psychedelics and marijuana predicted non-realist and subjectivist views of morality and aesthetics; having had a transformative or self-transcendent experience predicted theism and idealism. We discuss whether or not these empirical results have philosophical implications, while noting that 68% of our sample of professional philosophers indicated that such findings would indeed have philosophical value.
Boston Studies in the Philosophy and History of Science, 2019
This chapter argues for the centrality of Neurath’s syntacticism to his physicalism, encyclopedis... more This chapter argues for the centrality of Neurath’s syntacticism to his physicalism, encyclopedism, and the unity of science program. I defend the intelligibility of Neurath’s opposition to semantics and underline the role syntacticism plays in his anti-metaphysical empiricism. I argue that Neurath was correct to fear that the semantic turn would spell the end of logical empiricism. Many of the most influential metaphysical arguments of the twentieth century turn on premises that would be undermined by a Neurathian rejection of semantics.
This paper introduces the concept of linguistic hijacking, the phenomenon wherein politically sig... more This paper introduces the concept of linguistic hijacking, the phenomenon wherein politically significant terminology is co-opted by dominant groups in ways that further their dominance over marginalized groups. Here I focus on hijackings of the words “racist” and “racism.” The model of linguistic hijacking developed here, called the semantic corruption model, is inspired by Burge’s social externalism, in which deference plays a key role in determining the semantic properties of expressions. The model describes networks of deference relations, which support competing meanings of, for example, “racist,” and postulates the existence of deference magnets that influence those networks over time. Linguistic hijacking functions to shift the semantic properties of crucial political terminology by causing changes in deference networks, spreading semantics that serve the interests of dominant groups, and weakening the influence of resistant deference networks. I consider an objection allegin...
Do psychological traits predict philosophical views? We administered the PhilPapers Survey, creat... more Do psychological traits predict philosophical views? We administered the PhilPapers Survey, created by David Bourget and David Chalmers, which consists of 30 views on central philosophical topics (e.g., epistemology, ethics, metaphysics , philosophy of mind, and philosophy of language) to a sample of professional philosophers (N = 314). We extended the PhilPapers survey to measure a number of psychological traits, such as personality, numeracy, well-being, lifestyle, and life experiences. We also included non-technical 'translations' of these views for eventual use in other populations. We found limited to no support for the notion that personality or demographics predict philosophical views. We did, however, find that some psychological traits were predictive of philosophical views, even after strict correction for multiple comparisons. Findings include: higher interest in numeracy predicted physicalism, naturalism, and consequentialism; lower levels of well-being and higher levels of mental illness predicted hard determinism; using substances such as psychedelics and marijuana predicted non-realist and subjectivist views of morality and aesthetics; having had a transformative or self-transcendent experience predicted theism and idealism. We discuss whether or not these empirical results have philosophical implications, while noting that 68% of our sample of professional philosophers indicated that such findings would indeed have philosophical value.
Third-order exclusion is a form of epistemic oppression in which the epistemic lifeway of a domin... more Third-order exclusion is a form of epistemic oppression in which the epistemic lifeway of a dominant group disrupts the epistemic agency of members of marginalized groups. In this paper we apply situated perspectives in order to argue that philosophy as a discipline imposes third-order exclusions on members of marginalized groups who are interested in participating in philosophy. We examine a number of specific aspects of the epistemic lifeway embodied by academic philosophy and show how this produces inaccessibility to the discipline. In addition to critiquing the discipline and its methods we also use this discussion to elaborate on third-order exclusion itself. We conclude by proposing an intersectional pedagogy as a step toward creating a more accessible discipline.
The debate over safe spaces has traditionally been cast as a conflict between competing goals. On... more The debate over safe spaces has traditionally been cast as a conflict between competing goals. On the one hand we have epistemic goals such as the pursuit of truth and the free exchange of ideas. On the other we have social, political, and ethical goals centered on protecting marginalized students from emotional and psychological trauma. Even proponents of safe space initiatives will often distinguish them from brave spaces, where brave spaces aim at truth as opposed to safety. Using concepts drawn from recent literature in social epistemology, this essay reframes the debate by developing a new epistemological conception of safe spaces. On this conception, the purpose of safe space initiatives is to safeguard marginalized students and colleagues against epistemic oppression and epistemic injustice and to promote recognition of situated knowledge, thereby promoting the pursuit of truth and the free exchange of ideas. These goals demonstrably align with the practices employed within traditional safe space initiatives, but also suggest new directives for creating and sustaining safe spaces that are explicitly aimed at combatting the effects of epistemic oppression. I show how this conception helps to defuse some of the traditional objections to creating safe spaces within academic settings.
This paper introduces the concept of linguistic hijacking, the phenomenon wherein politically sig... more This paper introduces the concept of linguistic hijacking, the phenomenon wherein politically significant terminology is co-opted by dominant groups in ways that further their dominance over marginalized groups. Here I focus on hijackings of the words "racist" and "racism." The model of linguistic hijacking developed here, called the semantic corruption model, is inspired by Burge's social externalism, in which deference plays a key role in determining the semantic properties of expressions. The model describes networks of deference relations, which support competing meanings of, for example, "racist," and postulates the existence of deference magnets that influence those networks over time. Linguistic hijacking functions to shift the semantic properties of crucial political terminology by causing changes in deference networks, spreading semantics that serve the interests of dominant groups, and weakening the influence of resistant deference networks. I consider an objection alleging the semantic corruption model gets the semantic data wrong because it entails those who hijack terms like "racist" speak truly, whereas it's natural to see such hijacking misuses as false speech about racism. I then respond to this objection by invoking the framework of metalinguistic negotiation proposed by Plunkett and Sundell.
This chapter argues for the centrality of Neurath's syntacticism to his physicalism, encyclopedis... more This chapter argues for the centrality of Neurath's syntacticism to his physicalism, encyclopedism, and the unity of science program. I defend the intelligibility of Neurath's opposition to semantics and underline the role syntacticism plays in his anti-metaphysical empiricism. I argue that Neurath was correct to fear that the semantic turn would spell the end of logical empiricism. Many of the most influential metaphysical arguments of the 20 th century turn on premises that would be undermined by a Neurathian rejection of semantics.
This paper replies to criticism of Anderson (2017), arguing that, as an aspect of structural epis... more This paper replies to criticism of Anderson (2017), arguing that, as an aspect of structural epistemic oppression, there is no causal criteria for conceptual competence injustice. The paper articulates important differences between conceptual competence injustice and Fricker's notion of testimonial injustice and argues for the explanatory significance of the former.
This paper identifies the phenomenon of conceptual competence injustice, a form of epistemic inju... more This paper identifies the phenomenon of conceptual competence injustice, a form of epistemic injustice that occurs when a marginalized epistemic agent makes a conceptual claim and is illegitimately regarded as having failed to grasp one or more of the concepts expressed in her testimony. The notion of a conceptual claim is given a deflationary account that is coextensive with the class of a priori knowable claims. This study reveals a form of oppression that severely hinders marginalized epistemic agents who seek to create or communicate conceptual knowledge. Conceptual competence injustice is compared and contrasted with three other forms of epistemic injustice: testimonial injustice, hermeneutical injustice, and contributory injustice. The final section investigates a number of damaging effects that conceptual competence injustice has on marginalized persons pursuing a career in academic philosophy.
Third-order exclusion is a form of epistemic oppression in which the epistemic lifeway of a domin... more Third-order exclusion is a form of epistemic oppression in which the epistemic lifeway of a dominant group disrupts the epistemic agency of members of marginalized groups. In this paper we apply situated perspectives in order to argue that philosophy as a discipline imposes third-order exclusions on members of marginalized groups who are interested in participating in philosophy. We examine a number of specific aspects of the epistemic lifeway embodied by academic philosophy and show how this produces inaccessibility to the discipline. In addition to critiquing the discipline and its methods we also use this discussion to elaborate on third-order exclusion itself. We conclude by proposing an intersectional pedagogy as a step toward creating a more accessible discipline.
ABSTRACT Do psychological traits predict philosophical views? We administered the PhilPapers Surv... more ABSTRACT Do psychological traits predict philosophical views? We administered the PhilPapers Survey, created by David Bourget and David Chalmers, which consists of 30 views on central philosophical topics (e.g., epistemology, ethics, metaphysics, philosophy of mind, and philosophy of language) to a sample of professional philosophers (N = 314). We extended the PhilPapers survey to measure a number of psychological traits, such as personality, numeracy, well-being, lifestyle, and life experiences. We also included non-technical ‘translations’ of these views for eventual use in other populations. We found limited to no support for the notion that personality or demographics predict philosophical views. We did, however, find that some psychological traits were predictive of philosophical views, even after strict correction for multiple comparisons. Findings include: higher interest in numeracy predicted physicalism, naturalism, and consequentialism; lower levels of well-being and higher levels of mental illness predicted hard determinism; using substances such as psychedelics and marijuana predicted non-realist and subjectivist views of morality and aesthetics; having had a transformative or self-transcendent experience predicted theism and idealism. We discuss whether or not these empirical results have philosophical implications, while noting that 68% of our sample of professional philosophers indicated that such findings would indeed have philosophical value.
Uploads
Papers by Derek Anderson