My philosophical views

Question Answer Comments
A priori knowledge: yes and no Accept: no
Abstract objects: Platonism and nominalism Lean toward: nominalism
Aesthetic value: objective and subjective Accept another alternative There is no such thing as 100% objectivity, nor subjectivity. "Fitness for purpose" is preferred.
Analytic-synthetic distinction: yes and no Accept an intermediate view Unless this issue looks to a very specific context, the question cannot be answered
Epistemic justification: internalism and externalism Accept an intermediate view
External world: idealism, skepticism or non-skeptical realism Lean toward: skepticism
Free will: compatibilism, libertarianism or no free will Accept another alternative If you insist = Pythagoras = the fitness of purpose
God: theism and atheism There is no fact of the matter
Knowledge: empiricism and rationalism Accept another alternative These are scientific clear cut questions and answers = agian, real knowledge is neither rational or compeltely empiric = ask Jacques Maritain
Knowledge claims: contextualism, relativism or invariantism Accept another alternative Unfair question: I am a cyberneticist / radical social constructivist = knowledge claims will arise from contextual situations that are also relative to the participants' beliefs, making both contextualism and relativism adaptable to the living circumstances ...
Laws of nature: Humean and non-Humean Reject both
Logic: classical and non-classical Reject both
Mental content: internalism and externalism Accept another alternative Mental 'content' does not come from outside nor from inside - it is constructed in the in-between
Meta-ethics: moral realism and moral anti-realism There is no fact of the matter
Metaphilosophy: naturalism and non-naturalism Reject both There has to be a reconciliation bewteen what we consider naturasl and artificial
Mind: physicalism and non-physicalism Accept another alternative Mind resides in neither body nor brain, but in the space of interaction between
Moral judgment: cognitivism and non-cognitivism Accept another alternative No moral judgment, only ethics derived from living social and civic circumstances
Moral motivation: internalism and externalism Reject both
Newcomb's problem: one box and two boxes Reject both Life is not a gamble ... and not a game either
Normative ethics: deontology, consequentialism or virtue ethics Reject all Morals only exist as rules written down by those who benefit from the act. Ethics are derived from the circumstances of sustainable design theory's first principle: first, do no harm.
Perceptual experience: disjunctivism, qualia theory, representationalism or sense-datum theory Accept another alternative Don't you think these questions are too cut-and-dried? Perceptual experience is mediated by other people, by the environemnt, by objects, and it arrives inside our heads as signals from the great void out there - we have to translate these signals and become confused when persuaded that there is no gap between receiving and translating.
Personal identity: biological view, psychological view or further-fact view Lean toward: further-fact view
Politics: communitarianism, egalitarianism or libertarianism Accept another alternative Not one of these three examples are real. They might be dispositions, but cannot be classed asa human categories to choose from
Proper names: Fregean and Millian Insufficiently familiar with the issue
Science: scientific realism and scientific anti-realism Reject both
Teletransporter (new matter): survival and death The question is too unclear to answer Philosophy of science fiction?
Time: A-theory and B-theory The question is too unclear to answer
Trolley problem (five straight ahead, one on side track, turn requires switching, what ought one do?): switch and don't switch Insufficiently familiar with the issue
Truth: correspondence, deflationary or epistemic Accept: correspondence
Zombies: inconceivable, conceivable but not metaphysically possible or metaphysically possible Reject all This is a serious question?