Philosophy might be a bubble in which people believe strange things , but that doesn't mean the strange things are wrong. We generally accept that academic specialists have both different and better beliefs than laypeople. Physicists in particular.
Philosophy might be a bubble, but it's not the only one.
Theres a postmodern/ relativist bubble that rejects alethic realism, the concept of objective truth , in much the way that you reject moral realism -- aghast complaints that they can't imagine how truth could be a thing existing outside minds, how it could be out there, how it could be more than a fancy description of belief.
There's the Yay Science bubble, people who believe in extra ordinary claim about philosophy --- that it's the only subject whose.praxtioners.have no special expertise -- and on top of that, scientists can pronounce authoritatively on philosophy without studying it.
" is a good example of a professional philosopher doing the thing I’ve objected to before: the underspecified appeal to intuitions/appearances/seemings"
Intuitions are bad. Intuitions are also unavoidable. So philosophy is hard.
I agree there are lots of bubbles outside of philosophy that have their own problems. Psychology is one of them, though I have concerns with academia more generally as well.
Intuitions are fine, to me, as long as they're checked against other intuitions and the world around us, and don't become dogmas to be retained all (or nearly all) costs.
Philosophy might be a bubble in which people believe strange things , but that doesn't mean the strange things are wrong. We generally accept that academic specialists have both different and better beliefs than laypeople. Physicists in particular.
Philosophy might be a bubble, but it's not the only one.
Theres a postmodern/ relativist bubble that rejects alethic realism, the concept of objective truth , in much the way that you reject moral realism -- aghast complaints that they can't imagine how truth could be a thing existing outside minds, how it could be out there, how it could be more than a fancy description of belief.
There's the Yay Science bubble, people who believe in extra ordinary claim about philosophy --- that it's the only subject whose.praxtioners.have no special expertise -- and on top of that, scientists can pronounce authoritatively on philosophy without studying it.
" is a good example of a professional philosopher doing the thing I’ve objected to before: the underspecified appeal to intuitions/appearances/seemings"
Intuitions are bad. Intuitions are also unavoidable. So philosophy is hard.
I agree there are lots of bubbles outside of philosophy that have their own problems. Psychology is one of them, though I have concerns with academia more generally as well.
Intuitions are fine, to me, as long as they're checked against other intuitions and the world around us, and don't become dogmas to be retained all (or nearly all) costs.