Philosophy and Phenomenological Research
Wiley-Blackwell Publishing, Inc.
In this paper I will argue that this entire dialectic is somewhat misguided. The mental states which are generally assumed to fall under the category of ‘intuition’ likely comprise a highly heterogeneous group; from the point of view of psychology or of neuroscience, in fact, ‘intuitions’ appear to be generated by several fundamentally different sorts of mental processes. If this is correct, then the term ‘intuition’ may simply carve things too broadly. I will argue that it is a mistake to focus on the ‘reliability of intuition’; empirical evidence suggests that the reliability of one type of intuition may tell us next to nothing about the reliability of other types. Rather than debating the evidential status of intuition as a whole, philosophers interested in methodology would do well to focus their investigations much more narrowly.
Copyright © 2012 Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, LLC
Access to external full text or publisher's version may require subscription.
Accepted Author Manuscript
Nado, J. E. (2014). Why intuition? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 86(1), 15-41. doi: 10.1111/j.1933-1592.2012.00644.x