Putting the Trolley in Order: Experimental Philosophy and the Loop Case

In recent years, a number of philosophers have been conducting empirical studies that survey people’s intuitions about various subject matters in philosophy. Some have found that intuitions vary accordingly to seemingly irrelevant facts: facts about who is considering the hypothetical case, the presence or absence of certain kinds of content, or the context in which the hypothetical case is being considered. Our research applies this experimental philosophical methodology to Judith Jarvis Thomson’s famous Loop Case, which she used to call into question the validity of the intuitively plausible Doctrine of Double Effect. We found that intuitions about the Loop Case vary according to the context in which the case is considered. We contend that this undermines the supposed evidential status of intuitions about the Loop Case. We conclude by considering the implications of our findings for philosophers who rely on the Loop Case to make philosophical points and for philosophers who use intuitions in general. [Philosophical Psychology, forthcoming, with Alex Wiegmann, Joshua Alexander and Gerard Vong] [pdf | html]

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Jun 6th, 2011 | By | Category: Ethics, Latest Research

Leave Comment

(Spamcheck Enabled)