Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c4f8m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-16T17:55:01.098Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Stability of Philosophical Intuitions: Failed Replications of Swain et al. (2008)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 August 2019

Adrian Ziółkowski Open the ORCID record for Adrian Ziółkowski [Opens in a new window]
Adrian Ziółkowski*
Affiliation:
Institute of Philosophy, University of Warsaw
*
*Corresponding author. Email: adrian.a.ziolkowski@uw.edu.pl
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In their widely cited article, Swain et al. (2008) report data that, purportedly, demonstrates instability of folk epistemic intuitions regarding the famous Truetemp case authored by Keith Lehrer. What they found is a typical example of priming, where presenting one stimulus before presenting another stimulus affects the way the latter is perceived or evaluated. In their experiment, laypersons were less likely to attribute knowledge in the Truetemp case when they first read a scenario describing a clear case of knowledge, and more likely to ascribe knowledge when they first read a vignette describing a clear case of nonknowledge. We tried to replicate Swain et al. findings in three experiments: one devised in Polish, and the other two conducted in English. We found no priming effect for knowledge ratings regarding the Truetemp case – laypersons were similarly likely to attribute knowledge in all three investigated conditions (primed with a clear case of knowledge, primed with a clear case of nonknowledge, and not primed). These three failed replication attempts are not decisive as to whether the priming effect in question occurs, nevertheless, the collected data puts Swain et al. conclusions about instability of epistemic intuitions in jeopardy.

Keywords

experimental philosophyreplicationepistemic intuitionsknowledge attributionspriming effectTruetemp case
Type
Article
Information
Episteme , Volume 18 , Issue 2 , June 2021 , pp. 328 - 346
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adleberg, T., Thompson, M. and Nahmias, E. (2015). ‘Do Men and Women have Different Philosophical Intuitions? Further Data.’ Philosophical Psychology 28(5), 615–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buckwalter, W. and Stich, S. (2013). ‘Gender and Philosophical Intuition.’ In Knobe, J. and Nichols, S. (eds), Experimental Philosophy, Vol. 2, pp. 307–46. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for Behavioral Sciences, 2nd edn. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Collaboration, Open Science (2015). ‘Estimating the Reproducibility of Psychological Science.’ Science 349(6251), aac4716–aac4716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colaço, D., Buckwalter, W., Stich, S. and Machery, E. (2014). ‘Epistemic Intuitions in Fake-Barn Thought Experiments.’ Episteme 11, 199–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cova, F., Strickland, B., Abatista, A. et al. (2018). ‘Estimating the Reproducibility of Experimental Philosophy.’ Review of Philosophy and Psychology, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13164-018-0400-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldman, A.I. (1976). ‘Discrimination and Perceptual Knowledge.’ Journal of Philosophy 73, 771–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, D.J., Cheung, F. and Donnellan, M.B. (2014). ‘Does Cleanliness Influence Moral Judgments? A Direct Replication of Schnall, Benton, and Harvey (2008).’ Social Psychology 45(3), 209–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, M. and Yuan, Y. (2015). ‘No Cross-Cultural Differences in the Gettier Car Case Intuition: A Replication study of Weinberg et al. 2001.’ Episteme 12(3), 355–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knobe, J. (2003). ‘Intentional Action and Side Effects in Ordinary Language.’ Analysis 63(3), 190–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lehrer, K. (1990). Theory of Knowledge. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Machery, E, Mallon, R, Nichols, S. and Stich, S. (2004). ‘Semantics, Cross-cultural Style.’ Cognition 92, B1–B12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nadelhoffer, T. and Nahmias, E. (2007). ‘The Past and Future of Experimental Philosophy.’ Philosophical Explorations 10, 123–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nagel, J., San Juan, V. and Mar, R. (2013). ‘Lay Denial of Knowledge for Justified True Beliefs.’ Cognition 129(3), 652–61.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schnall, S., Benton, J. and Harvey, S. (2009). ‘With a Clean Conscience.’ Psychological Science 19(12), 1219–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seyedsayamdost, H. (2015a). ‘On Normativity and Epistemic Intuitions: Failure of Replication.’ Episteme 12(1), 95–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seyedsayamdost, H. (2015b). ‘On Gender and Philosophical Intuition. Failure of Replication and Other Negative Results.’ Philosophical Psychology 28(5), 642–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Starmans, C. and Friedman, O. (2012). ‘The Folk Conception of Knowledge.’ Cognition 124(3), 272–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Swain, S., Alexander, J. and Weinberg, J.M. (2008). ‘The Instability of Philosophical Intuitions: Running Hot and Cold on Truetemp.’ Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 76(1), 138–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weinberg, J.M., Nichols, S. and Stich, S. (2001). ‘Normativity and Epistemic Intuitions.’ Philosophical Topics 29(1–2), 429–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weinberg, J.M., Alexander, J., Gonnerman, C. and Reuter, S. (2012). ‘Restrictionism and Reflection: Challenge Deflected, or Simply Redirected?’ The Monist 95(2), 200–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, J.C. (2010). ‘On Intuitional Stability: The Clear, the Strong, and the Paradigmatic.’ Cognition 115(3), 491–503.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ziółkowski, A. (2016). ‘Folk Intuitions and the No-Luck-Thesis.’ Episteme 13(3), 343–58.10.1017/epi.2015.49CrossRefGoogle Scholar