The Armchair on Trial

Topic:
This year'sannual WFAP graduate conference is devoted to debates around philosophical methodology. It is centered around the question of whether philosophy is best done from the philosophical armchair or whether it can and should be done using empirical methods. The conference is focused on the extent to which the emergence of naturalistic approaches and of experimental philosophy (“X-Phi”) pose a problem to ‘traditional’ armchair methods (e.g. consulting intuitions, conceptual analysis, reflective equilibrium, conceptual engineering). We are interested both in work that focuses on individual methods or on the relations between them (e.g. their compatibility).

We aim to bring together early career and advanced researchers in order to discuss questions such as: 

• What is the role of intuition in philosophy?

• What is the role of a priori knowledge in philosophy?

• What is the role of X-Phi in philosophy?

• What is the role of conceptual analysis in philosophy?

• What is the role of conceptual engineering in philosophy?

• What is the role of linguistic and conceptual competence in philosophy?

• What is the role of formal methods in philosophy?

• Is philosophy importantly distinct from other sciences? 

• How can advocates of armchair methods best respond to the challenges raised by X-Phi?

• Are armchair philosophy and X-Phi reconcilable?

• Considering the methodological discussions listed above, are professional philosophers epistemically better positioned for answering philosophical questions than lay people? E.g. Do they have better conceptual competence? Are they expert intuiters?

We welcome submissions that apply these methodological issues to other philosophical debates as case studies.