Pleading ignorance in response to experiential primitivism

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Modal arguments like the Knowledge Argument, the Conceivability Argument and the Inverted Spectrum Argument could be used to argue for experiential primitivism; the view that experiential truths aren’t entailed from nonexperiential truths. A way to resist these arguments is to follow Stoljar (Ignorance and imagination. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2006) and plead ignorance of a type of experience-relevant nonexperiential truth. If we are ignorant of such a truth, we can’t imagine or conceive of the various sorts of scenarios that are required to make these arguments sound. While I am sympathetic to this response, in this article I will argue that we have good reason to believe that this particular ignorance hypothesis is false.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)251-269
Number of pages19
JournalPhilosophical Studies
Volume163
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 14 Sept 2011

Keywords

  • Conceivability
  • Consciousness
  • Epistemic gap
  • Ignorance hypothesis
  • Panpsychism
  • Physicalism
  • Qualia
  • Ramseyan humility
  • Zombies

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Pleading ignorance in response to experiential primitivism'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this