My philosophical views

Question Answer Comments
A priori knowledge: yes and no Accept: yes
Abstract objects: Platonism and nominalism Accept: Platonism For (nearly) any meaningful open sentence, there's something it expresses.
Aesthetic value: objective and subjective Accept: objective Normativity isn't up to us in any meaningful sense; this is a special case of that more general truth
Analytic-synthetic distinction: yes and no Accept: no
Epistemic justification: internalism and externalism The question is too unclear to answer I accept externalism about nearly any interesting kind of positive epistemic status. I accept Alstonian views about epistemic justification and "epistemic justification".
External world: idealism, skepticism or non-skeptical realism Accept: non-skeptical realism
Free will: compatibilism, libertarianism or no free will Accept another alternative Semi-compatibilism: though free will is incompatible with determinism, moral responsibility is compatible with determinism.
God: theism and atheism Accept: theism No argument for theism is decisive; very few philosophical arguments have that feature. But theism is more likely than its denial.
Knowledge: empiricism and rationalism Accept: rationalism
Knowledge claims: contextualism, relativism or invariantism Accept: invariantism
Laws of nature: Humean and non-Humean Lean toward: non-Humean Laws govern. I think.
Logic: classical and non-classical Accept: classical I accept this thesis: every proposition is either true or false, and no proposition is both true and false. I think that means I accept "classical logic".
Mental content: internalism and externalism Accept: externalism
Meta-ethics: moral realism and moral anti-realism Accept: moral realism
Metaphilosophy: naturalism and non-naturalism Accept: non-naturalism
Mind: physicalism and non-physicalism Accept: physicalism We humans are wholly material (physical) beings.
Moral judgment: cognitivism and non-cognitivism Accept: cognitivism
Moral motivation: internalism and externalism Accept: externalism
Newcomb's problem: one box and two boxes Insufficiently familiar with the issue
Normative ethics: deontology, consequentialism or virtue ethics The question is too unclear to answer Consequentialism is false. But what follows from that is less than clear to me.
Perceptual experience: disjunctivism, qualia theory, representationalism or sense-datum theory The question is too unclear to answer
Personal identity: biological view, psychological view or further-fact view Agnostic/undecided Though I accept animalism (we humans are animals), I am agnostic about the conditions under which one of us persists.
Politics: communitarianism, egalitarianism or libertarianism Accept: libertarianism I am at heart an anarchist -- but I happily live in and regularly praise a non-liberal technocratic democracy (Singapore)
Proper names: Fregean and Millian Accept: Fregean
Science: scientific realism and scientific anti-realism The question is too unclear to answer "Science" is said in many ways. Accordingly, I accept realism about some sciences and withhold judgement about others.
Teletransporter (new matter): survival and death Accept: death Absent a miracle, at least!
Time: A-theory and B-theory Accept: B-theory
Trolley problem (five straight ahead, one on side track, turn requires switching, what ought one do?): switch and don't switch Accept: don't switch
Truth: correspondence, deflationary or epistemic The question is too unclear to answer "Epistemic" theories of truth are false. What follows isn't so clear.
Zombies: inconceivable, conceivable but not metaphysically possible or metaphysically possible Accept: metaphysically possible I also hold that the possibility of zombies need not tell against physicalism about human persons (a view I endorse).