Recently, analytic metaphysics has been attacked from a scientist’s perspective. In Everything Must Go, James Ladyman and Don Ross argued that analytic metaphysics should be dismissed and replaced with a naturalized metaphysics. In this paper, I critically discuss the arguments proposed in the book in order to determine whether this critique of analytic metaphysics is successful. In particular, Ladyman and Ross elaborate on three main points: the role of intuitions and the ensuing misunderstanding of science, the demarcation of science from non science, and the exclusive theoretical authority of science. I argue that none of their arguments succeeds in excluding analytic metaphysics from the list of respectable theoretical disciplines.
Analytic metaphysics should not go
STROLLO A
2017-01-01
Abstract
Recently, analytic metaphysics has been attacked from a scientist’s perspective. In Everything Must Go, James Ladyman and Don Ross argued that analytic metaphysics should be dismissed and replaced with a naturalized metaphysics. In this paper, I critically discuss the arguments proposed in the book in order to determine whether this critique of analytic metaphysics is successful. In particular, Ladyman and Ross elaborate on three main points: the role of intuitions and the ensuing misunderstanding of science, the demarcation of science from non science, and the exclusive theoretical authority of science. I argue that none of their arguments succeeds in excluding analytic metaphysics from the list of respectable theoretical disciplines.Pubblicazioni consigliate
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.