The Defective Armchair: A Reply to Tye

11Citations
Citations of this article
9Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Michael Tye's response to my “Grain” (Block) and “Windows” (Block) raises general metaphilosophical issues about the value of intuitions and judgments about one's perceptions and the relations of those intuitions and judgments to empirical research, as well as specific philosophical issues about the relation between seeing, attention and de re thought. I will argue that Tye's appeal to what is (§. 2) “intuitively obvious, once we reflect upon these cases” (“intuition”) is problematic. I will also argue that first person judgments can be problematic when used on their own as Tye does but can be valuable when integrated with empirical results.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Block, N. (2014). The Defective Armchair: A Reply to Tye. Thought, 3(2), 159–165. https://doi.org/10.1002/tht3.124

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free