My philosophical views

Question Answer Comments
A priori knowledge: yes and no Agnostic/undecided
Abstract objects: Platonism and nominalism Agnostic/undecided
Aesthetic value: objective and subjective The question is too unclear to answer For I would need to know what *exactly* is meant with subjective/objective here.
Analytic-synthetic distinction: yes and no Agnostic/undecided
Epistemic justification: internalism and externalism Insufficiently familiar with the issue
External world: idealism, skepticism or non-skeptical realism Agnostic/undecided
Free will: compatibilism, libertarianism or no free will Accept: compatibilism
God: theism and atheism Accept: atheism However, many self-professed atheists dismiss the theist alternatives too easily.
Knowledge: empiricism and rationalism Reject both
Knowledge claims: contextualism, relativism or invariantism Lean toward: invariantism
Laws of nature: Humean and non-Humean Lean toward: Humean But if you include so-called 'psychological laws' under this heading, I reject both.
Logic: classical and non-classical The question is too unclear to answer It depends on what you want to do with logic. Isn't that the upshot of the last 100 years or so of proliferation of non-classical systems?
Mental content: internalism and externalism Lean toward: externalism
Meta-ethics: moral realism and moral anti-realism Lean toward: moral realism Really hard as I have sympathies with certain constructivist views. I typically list those under 'realism', but I know most Ozzie types tend to dismiss constructivism altogether as a meta-ethical view. Furthermore, I recently have come to believe that moral realism makes sense for evaluative properties; that constructivism makes sense for deontic properties; and that anti-realism makes sense for some moral statements. But if I have to choose: my realist inclinations are strongest.
Metaphilosophy: naturalism and non-naturalism Accept: naturalism
Mind: physicalism and non-physicalism Accept: physicalism Having read too much Dennett....
Moral judgment: cognitivism and non-cognitivism Accept: cognitivism Some lingering doubts, however,.... More acceptance that leaning though
Moral motivation: internalism and externalism Lean toward: externalism Just because I used to hang out with externalist types...
Newcomb's problem: one box and two boxes Lean toward: one box Against my better judgment. I know it is a silly position to hold, and yet... and yet... Official answer is that this is connected to my views about constructivism in practical reason.
Normative ethics: deontology, consequentialism or virtue ethics Accept an intermediate view The three alternatives are straw-men of plausible normative ethical theories. A plausible theory will have elements of all three. Furthermore, *any* normative ethical theory will have elements of virtue, an axiology and deontic elements. Finally, you are comparing apples and pears as both consequentialism and deontology are typically characterized by the fact that they are very explicit about obligation, whereas this is very unclear with traditional virtue ethics.
Perceptual experience: disjunctivism, qualia theory, representationalism or sense-datum theory Insufficiently familiar with the issue
Personal identity: biological view, psychological view or further-fact view Agnostic/undecided
Politics: communitarianism, egalitarianism or libertarianism Accept another alternative
Proper names: Fregean and Millian Insufficiently familiar with the issue
Science: scientific realism and scientific anti-realism Agnostic/undecided
Teletransporter (new matter): survival and death Agnostic/undecided
Time: A-theory and B-theory Insufficiently familiar with the issue
Trolley problem (five straight ahead, one on side track, turn requires switching, what ought one do?): switch and don't switch Lean toward: switch This is not the real point about the Trolley problem in my opinion. Many people, including philosophers hold all kinds of contrasting and even inconsistent views on this. I sincerely hope you will not use this as a way to discriminate between those who have consequentialist leanings and those who do not.
Truth: correspondence, deflationary or epistemic Agnostic/undecided
Zombies: inconceivable, conceivable but not metaphysically possible or metaphysically possible Agnostic/undecided