by Ricardo P. Liebowitz, Myrtle May Zucker and Van von Wilhelm Vonvonivich

University of Applied Applications

Introduction

X-phi is severely weakened if a certain cluster of empirical claims is shown false. While the jury is still out, there are grounds to think key claims within this cluster are false. Evidence comes from a series of ongoing studies of intuitions we have been conducting. It is incumbent upon those of us who pursue X-phi to explain why these results do not refute key hypotheses we all take for granted. Our aim is not to attack X-phi but to shift the burden of argument. It is common for us to proceed as if the empirical assumptions challenged here are true. We will be satisfied if we all recognize this is no longer acceptable.

Empirically Driven Romanticism

To use the name “experimental philosophy” is to take a position on a certain normative question, the question of how we ought to conceive of what we are doing when we hand out surveys to our undergrads. Specifically, it is to assume that X-phi ought to be regarded as real philosophical inquiry. This assumption can be supported by a priori conceptual analysis of the concept of ‘philosophical inquiry.’ Or it can be supported by gathering experimental data concerning folk intuitions about when that concept is applicable. It would be incoherent for experimental philosophers to adopt the former approach. The latter approach, while crucial to the entire project of X-phi, has never been undertaken. Until now.

The Study

In our study, 429 undergraduates were asked to fill out the following questionnaire.

Results

The above questionnaire was distributed in various sections of a freshman-level Introduction to Philosophy course. Upon receipt, several subjects complained that they were not here when we went over this. Others wanted to know whether it would affect their grade. Upon being informed that it would not, most went to sleep or got out their cell phones. Numerous other subjects were obviously illiterate. Thus our data set was severely limited. Nonetheless, valuable results were obtained. They are summarized here and reported in full in the Appendix (forthcoming).

87.4% exhibited strong agreement on questions 3 and 4.

Only 22.9% of subjects exhibited a positive response on Question 2 with 13.1% choosing “All of the above.”

Only 11.6% of subjects exhibited a positive response to Question 1 with none exhibiting strong agreement while 98.1% expressed strong disagreement. Addition leads us to conclude that some of them may have answered this one twice.