Expertise Filosófica como Expertise em Intuir
Keywords:
epistemologia, expertise filosófica, intuition, progresso filosófico, entendimentoAbstract
Intuitions are intellectual impressions, seemings, or experiences that happen to us when we consider something and this seems true or false to us. Propositions like 2 + 2 = 4; if an object is blue, then it is colored; torturing people just for fun is morally wrong; a subject can not have knowledge by luck, etc., are propositions that can be justified by intuitions. Some of these propositions fall within the purview of philosophy, to viz, the moral proposition and the proposition about knowledge. Philosophers are experts in what they do, but what is this that they do? It’s known in the literature that philosophers traditionally use intuitions as evidence to corroborate or refute a thesis. Based on the psychological literature about expert intuition collected by Elijah Chudnoff (2021), I claim that a type of philosophical expertise is expert intuition. One can object that this traditional way of doing philosophy doesn’t provide progress and that can be seen in the profound disagreement that is present in the philosophical literature. Against this objection, I reply that philosophical progress can occur in spite of disagreement. For this, I use a theory of progress that is linked with the notion of understanding developed by Finnur Dellsén (2021, 2022 and 2023).
Keywords: Epistemology, Philosopical Expertise, Intuition, Philosophical Progress, Understanding
References
BEALER, George. The Incoherence of Empiricism. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume, v. 66, n. 1, 1992, p. 99–144.
_______. (1998) Intuition and the Autonomy of Philosophy. In: DEPAUL, M.; RAMSEY, W. (Ed.). Rethinking Intuition: The Psychology of Intuition and Its Role in Philosophical Inquiry, Lanham, Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield, 1998, p. 201-240.
BENGSON, John. The Intellectual Given. Mind, v. 124, n. 495, 2015, p. 707–760.
BOOTH, Anthony Robert; ROWBOTTOM, Darrell P. Intuitions. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014
BOURGET, David; CHALMERS, David.What do philosophers believe? Philosophical Studies, 170, 2014, 465–500.
_______. Philosophers on Philosophy: The 2020 PhilPapers Survey. Philosophers’ Imprint (1), 2023.
BOGARDUS, Tomas; PERRIN, Will. Knowledge is Believing Something Because It’s True. Episteme, Volume 19, Issue 2, June 2022, pp. 178 – 196.
BOYD, Kenneth. Enviromenmental Luck and The Structure of Understanding. Episteme, v. 17, n. 1, p. 73–87, 2020
CATH, Yuri. Knowing How without Knowing That. In: BENGSON, J.; MOFFETT, M.. Knowing How: Essays on Knowledge, Mind, and Action. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 113-135. 2011.
_______. Revisionary intellectualism and Gettier. Philosophical Studies, v. 172, n. 1, p. 7–27, 2015.
CHI, Michelene. Theoretical Perspectives, Methodological Approaches, and Trends in the Study of Expertise. In LI, Y.; KAISER, G. (eds.) Expertise in Mathematics Instruction. New York, NY: Springer: 17–39, 2011.
CHUDNOFF, Elijah. What Intuitions Are Like. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, v. 82, n. 3, p. 625–654, 2011.
_______. Intuition. Oxford, United Kingdom; New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2013.
_______. Forming Impressions: Expertise in Perception and Intuition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2021.
CLARK, Michael. Knowledge and grounds: A comment on Mr. Gettier’s paper. Analysis, 24(2), p. 46-48, 1963
DAVIDSON, Janet; STERNBERG, Robert. The Psychology of Problem Solving. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
DELLSÉN, Finnur. Understanding Scientific Progress: The Noetic Account. Synthese 199, no. 3: 11249- 11278, 2021
DELLSÉN, Finnur; LAWLER, Insa; NORTON, James. Thinking About Progress: From Science to Philosophy. Noûs 56, no. 4: p. 814–840, 2022
_______. Would Disagreement Undermine Progress? Journal of Philosophy 120 (3): p. 139-172, 2023.
FRANCES, Bryan. Extensive Philosophical Agreement and Progress Metaphilosophy 48 (1-2): p.47-57, 2017
EARLENBAUGH, Joshua; MOLYNEUX, Bernard. Intuitions are inclinations to
believe. Philosophical Studies, v. 145, n. 1, p. 89–109, 2009.
ENGEL Jr., Mylan. Is Epistemic Luck Compatible With Knowledge? The Southern Journal of Philosophy, v. 30, n. 2, p. 59–75, 1992.
ELGIN, Catherine, Considered Judgment, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996.
GARCÍA, Octavio. The Testimony Challenge Against the Possibility of Philosophical Knowledge. Metaphilosophy 00 (0): p. 1–12, 2024.
GETTIER, Edmund. Is Justified True Belief Knowledge? Analysis, v. 23, n. 6, p. 121–123, 1963.
GOBET, Fernand; CHASSY, Philippe. Expertise and intuition: A tale of three theories. Minds and Machines 19(2): p. 151–80, 2009
GOLDMAN, Alvin, Philosophical Intuitions: Their Target, Their Source, and Their Epistemic Status, Grazer Philosophische Studien, 74(1): p.1–26, 2007.
GRECO, John. Episteme: Knowledge and Understanding. In: TIMPE, K.; BOYD, C. (Eds.).Virtues and their vices. First edition. Oxford, United Kingdom ; New York, NY: Oxford University Press. p. 285–302. 2014
GRIMM, Stephen. Is Understanding A Species Of Knowledge? The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, v. 57, n. 3, p. 515–535, 2006.
_______. Understanding as Knowledge of Causes. In: FAIRWEATHER, A. Bridges Between Virtue Epistemology and Philosophy of Science. Springer International Publishing, p. 329–345, 2014.
HARDWIG, John. Epistemic Dependence. Journal of Philosophy, 82(7): p. 335–349, 1985.
HILLS, Alison. Understanding Why. Noûs, v. 50, n. 4, p. 661–688, 2016.
HUEMER, Michael. Skepticism and the veil of perception. Lanham, Md: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2001.
_______. Ethical intuitionism. Basingstoke [England]; New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005.
JENKINS, Carrie, Intuition, ‘Intuition’, Concepts and the A Priori, In Booth Anthony Robert & P. Rowbottom Darrell (eds.), Intuitions. Oxford University Press, p. 91-115, 2014
KAHNEMANN, David. A perspective on judgment and choice: mapping bounded rationality, American Psychologist 58(9): p. 697–720, 2003.
KAHNEMANN, Daniel; KLEIN, Gary. Conditions for intuitive expertise: A failure to disagree. American Psychologist 64(6): p.515-526. 2009
KVANVIG, Jonathan L. The value of knowledge and the pursuit of understanding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
KELP, Christoph. Towards a Knowledge-Based Account of Understanding. In: GRIMM, S.; BAUMBERG, C.; AMMON, S. (eds.). Explaining understanding: new perspectives from epistemology and philosophy of science. New York ; London: Routledge,Taylor & Francis Group. p. 251–271. 2017.
KLEIN, Gary. Sources of Power: How People Make Decisions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2017.
KNOBLICH, Günther, OHLSSON, Stellan; HAIDER, Hilde; RHENIUS, Detlef. Constraint relaxation and chunk decomposition in insight problem solving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 25(6): p. 1534-1555, 1999.
KOKSVIK, Ole. Intuition and Conscious Reasoning, The Philosophical Quarterly, 63: p, 709–715, 2013
_______. Intuition as Conscious Experience. 1. ed. [s.l.]: Routledge, 2020.
LEWIS, David. Philosophical Papers: Volume I, New York: Oxford University Press. 1983.
LUDWIG, Kirk, The Epistemology of Thought Experiments: First Person versus Third Person Approaches, Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 31: p. 128–159, 2007.
MOFFETT, Marc. Intuitions as evidence. In: LASONEN-AARNIO, M. e Littlejohn LITTLEJOHN, C. (Eds.), Routledge Handbook of the Philosophy of Evidence. Routledge, p. 275-291, 2024.
NEWELL, Allen; SIMON, Herbert. Human Problem Solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1972.
POSTON, Ted. Know how to be Gettiered? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, v. 79, n. 3, p. 743–747, 2009.
PRITCHARD, Duncan. Knowledge, Understanding and Epistemic Value. In: O’HEAR, A. (ed.), Epistemology (Royal Institute of Philosophy Lectures). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009.
PRITCHARD, Duncan; MILLAR, Alan; HADDOCK, Adrian. The nature and value of knowledge: three investigations. New York: Oxford University Press, 2010.
RANALLI, Chris. The Puzzle of Philosophical Testimony. European Journal of Philosophy 28, no. p. 1142–1163, 2020.
ROBERTSON, Ian. S. Problem Solving: Perspectives from Cognition and Neuroscience, 2nd edition. London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group. 2016.
SCHINDLER, Samuel; SAINT-GERMIER, Pierre. Philosophical Expertise Put to the Test, Australasian Journal of Philosophy 101 (3): p. 592-608, 2023.
SOSA, Ernest. Minimal Intuition. In: DEPAUL, M.; RAMSEY, W. (Eds.), Rethinking Intuition: The Psychology of Intuition and Its Role in Philosophical Inquiry. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, p. 257–270, 1998.
SOSA, Ernest. Intuitions and Truth. In: Greenough, P. e Lynch, M. (Eds.). Truth and Realism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 208-226, 2006.
_______. Intuitions: Their Nature and Epistemic Efficacy, Grazer Philosophische Studien, v. 74 p. 51–67, 2007.
STANLEY, Jason; WILLLAMSON, Timothy. Knowing How. Journal of Philosophy, v. 98, n. 8, p. 411–444, 2001.
UNGER, Peter. An Analysis of Factual Knowledge. The Journal of Philosophy, v. 65, n. 6, p. 157–170, 1968.
ZAGZEBSKI, Linda. Recovering Understanding. In: STEUP, M. (ed.) Knowledge, Truth and Duty. Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 235-251, 2001.
WEINBERG, Jonathan; GONNERMAN, Chad; BUCKNER, Cameron; ALEXANDER, Joshua. Are Philosophers Expert Intuiters?, Philosophical Psychology 23/3: p. 331-55, 2010
WEINBER, Jonathan; CROWLEY, Stephen; GONNERMAN, Chad; VANDEWALKER, Ian; SWAIN, Stacey. Intuition and Calibration. Essays in Philosophy 13: p. 256-283, 2012.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Vinicius Dos Santos Rodrigues
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
- Autores mantém os direitos autorais e concedem à revista o direito de primeira publicação, com o trabalho simultaneamente licenciado sob a Creative Commons Attribution License que permite o compartilhamento do trabalho com reconhecimento da autoria do trabalho e publicação inicial nesta revista.
- Autores têm autorização para assumir contratos adicionais separadamente, para distribuição não-exclusiva da versão do trabalho publicada nesta revista (ex.: publicar em repositório institucional ou como capítulo de livro), com reconhecimento de autoria e publicação inicial nesta revista.
- Autores têm permissão e são estimulados a publicar e distribuir seu trabalho online (ex.: em repositórios institucionais ou na sua página pessoal) a qualquer ponto antes ou durante o processo editorial, já que isso pode gerar alterações produtivas, bem como aumentar o impacto e a citação do trabalho publicado (Veja O Efeito do Acesso Livre).
