View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Intuitions over arguments or arguments over intuitions? – An empirical study on Chinese participants.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Intuitions over arguments or arguments over intuitions? – An empirical study on Chinese participants.
Authors: Wu, Su (AUTHOR), Huang, Junwei (AUTHOR), Zhan, Hao (AUTHOR), Xu, Jiawei (AUTHOR)
Source: Philosophical Psychology. May2026, Vol. 39 Issue 4, p1421-1448. 28p.
Subjects: Argument, Intuition, Philosophy methodology, Experimental philosophy, Chinese people, Thought experiments, Cross-cultural studies
Abstract: According to experimental philosophers, the diversity and sensitivity of intuitions have posed a severe threat to the traditional philosophical methodology, which relies extensively on intuitions triggered by thought experiments. However, defenders of traditional armchair philosophical methodology argue that experimental philosophers misunderstand the importance of intuitions for philosophy. What philosophers genuinely rely on are arguments, which provide a reliable foundation for their judgments on thought experiments. However, a recent cross-cultural experiment conducted by Wysocki (2017) indicates that arguments do not affect the judgments about Gettier cases as philosophers once expected. That poses a challenge to those philosophers who contend that judgments are based on arguments. In this paper, we expand the experimental investigation of the effect of arguments on judgments about thought experiments. We report the result of three experiments in which eleven thought experiments drawn from multiple philosophical subdisciplines were used. It turns out that arguments have significant impacts on Chinese participants' judgments in response to most of these thought experiments. These results present new resources for defending the traditional methodology but also bring new challenges. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Philosophical Psychology is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
Text:
  Availability: 1
Header DbId: pbh
DbLabel: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
An: 193490363
AccessLevel: 6
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Intuitions over arguments or arguments over intuitions? – An empirical study on Chinese participants.
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Wu%2C+Su%22">Wu, Su</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Huang%2C+Junwei%22">Huang, Junwei</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Zhan%2C+Hao%22">Zhan, Hao</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Xu%2C+Jiawei%22">Xu, Jiawei</searchLink> (AUTHOR)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Philosophical+Psychology%22">Philosophical Psychology</searchLink>. May2026, Vol. 39 Issue 4, p1421-1448. 28p.
– Name: Subject
  Label: Subjects
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Argument%22">Argument</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Intuition%22">Intuition</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Philosophy+methodology%22">Philosophy methodology</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Experimental+philosophy%22">Experimental philosophy</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Chinese+people%22">Chinese people</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Thought+experiments%22">Thought experiments</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Cross-cultural+studies%22">Cross-cultural studies</searchLink>
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: According to experimental philosophers, the diversity and sensitivity of intuitions have posed a severe threat to the traditional philosophical methodology, which relies extensively on intuitions triggered by thought experiments. However, defenders of traditional armchair philosophical methodology argue that experimental philosophers misunderstand the importance of intuitions for philosophy. What philosophers genuinely rely on are arguments, which provide a reliable foundation for their judgments on thought experiments. However, a recent cross-cultural experiment conducted by Wysocki (2017) indicates that arguments do not affect the judgments about Gettier cases as philosophers once expected. That poses a challenge to those philosophers who contend that judgments are based on arguments. In this paper, we expand the experimental investigation of the effect of arguments on judgments about thought experiments. We report the result of three experiments in which eleven thought experiments drawn from multiple philosophical subdisciplines were used. It turns out that arguments have significant impacts on Chinese participants' judgments in response to most of these thought experiments. These results present new resources for defending the traditional methodology but also bring new challenges. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
– Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright
  Label:
  Group: Ab
  Data: <i>Copyright of Philosophical Psychology is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=pbh&AN=193490363
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/09515089.2025.2456570
    Languages:
      – Code: eng
        Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 28
        StartPage: 1421
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Argument
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Intuition
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Philosophy methodology
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Experimental philosophy
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Chinese people
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Thought experiments
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Cross-cultural studies
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Intuitions over arguments or arguments over intuitions? – An empirical study on Chinese participants.
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Wu, Su
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Huang, Junwei
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Zhan, Hao
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Xu, Jiawei
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 05
              Text: May2026
              Type: published
              Y: 2026
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 09515089
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 39
            – Type: issue
              Value: 4
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Philosophical Psychology
              Type: main
ResultId 1