PowerPointPrsentation

1
Do we really know what folk-psychology
is? Introducing Experimental Philosophy
2

• Definition
• Folk Theories are collections of intuitions held
  by
• novices (i.e., non-scientists) about objects and
• agents.
• Folk physics and mechanics (naive or intuitive
  physics)
• folk biology
• folk geometry
• folk psychology
• folk philosophy

3
Falling Object Problem
This airplane is carrying a canister of supplies
as it flies over a field. The plane drops the
canister.
Q Draw the path that the canister will follow
before it hits the ground.
4
C- Shaped Tube Problem
The c-shaped tube you see below is lying flat on
a table. A ball is placed in one end and
launched so that it proceeds through the tube and
out the other side.
Q Draw the path that the ball will take once it
exits the tube, starting at the given point.
5
The basic model behind the concept folk
sciences Step 1 Regard intuitions as models
/ theories Weak version Loosely connected
intuitions, implicit model Strong version FS as
almost closed model, mainly explicit
6
The basic model behind the concept folk
sciences Step 1 Regard intuitions as models
/ theories Weak version Loosely connected
intuitions, implicit model Strong version FS as
almost closed model, mainly explicit Step 2
Compare FS Things events as they appear
make sense (lay people) ES Things events as
they really are
7
The basic model behind the concept folk
sciences Step 1 Regard intuitions as models
/ theories Weak version Loosely connected
intuitions, implicit model Strong version FS as
almost closed model, mainly explicit Step 2
Compare FS Things events as they appear
make sense (lay people) ES Things events as
they really are Step 3 Note the
difference ES FS Contradictions abound.
8
The basic model behind the concept folk
sciences Step 1 Regard intuitions as models
/ theories Weak version Loosely connected
intuitions, implicit model Strong version FS as
almost closed model, mainly explicit Step 2
Compare FS Things events as they appear
make sense (lay people) ES Things events as
they really are Step 3 Note the
difference ES FS Contradictions abound.
Step 4 Evaluate ES gt FS, hence FS soon
became the study of errors illusions and Why
people do err so much and so often?
9
Folk Sciences as a branch of Psychology /
Cognitive Science e.g. Folk Physics first
studied by Gestalt Psychologists Köhler (1921)
Psychology has not yet even begun to
investigate the physics of ordinary men Physik
des naiven Menschen, which from a
purely biological standpoint, is much more
important than scientific physics itself.
10
Folk Psychology

• Folk psychology is laymans psychology a means
  of explaining the behaviour of others via their
  reasoning
• Robust mechanism for explaining and predicting
  the behaviours of others
• It is also commonly used to explain ones own
  behaviour

11
Theory-Theory Is folk psychology a fully
developed psychological theory?

• makes generalizations ("laws") over a broad range
  of events
• organizes / groups mental events
• has empirical consequences which are subject to
  verification or falsification
• makes predictions about the future
• hence, looks like a theory.

12
Folk Psychology

• Like any Folk Science gt Errors abound
• Due to Epistemic Assymmetry, hardly reducible
• Leads to a Radical proposal eliminate FP

13
Eliminativism

• All the signs are that FP is false, so it should
  go the way of other false theories
• alchemy
• the ether
• etc.
• Elimination!

14
Eliminativism

• Ununifiable with the rest of science
• The categories of FP stand magnificent and alone
  (intentions, feelings, qualia, etc.)
• There is no sign that a science using such
  concepts can be reduced to any of the natural
  sciences gt the framework is entirely different

15
The Middle Path

• Study FP
• before you eliminate it
• to understand the Mind
• to measure theories
• to know what to eliminate
• to find phenomena in need of explanations
• for the sake of methodological pluralism

16
Why FP deserves our attention   Historical
Emancipation of Psychology from Religion
(experiential approach), Old Philosophy, and more
liberal, 1st person approaches. But it did not
become less important. Difference Folk
Physics is there to be overcome. Folk Psychology
is here to stay in order to be understood.
17
Also, consider that
1. Even experimental psychologists are folk
psychologists, at least sometimes (i.e. in their
everyday life). 2. Theories are generated on
the basis of what we experience experimental
evidence is but one part of this set of
experiences. 3. folk psychology is relevant
because its entities serves as the basis of much
of the behavioural sciences.
18
Furthermore A theory of mind which takes
seriously the mind has to start with the mind as
it experiences and understands itself (FP). A
theory of the role of the mind in the world takes
seriously the role mind ascribes to itself
pretheoretically.
19
FP is different insofar as its entities are
experienced entities. Cf. epistemic assymmetry
1st Person 3rd Person Approaches Not so for
the other folk sciences all of these can be
reduced to the basic program of folk
psychology How we make sense of ourselves and
the world.
20
Phenomena
Observations Intuitions Tradition Secondary
Channels (religion, etc.)
Folk Sciences
How do people make sense of themselves and the
world?
Content What do people think or believe about
X?
Processes Why do they think/believe that X?
21
What
How
Why
22
How do people make sense of themselves and the
world?
Folk Sciences are person-centered (even physics,
geometry, etc.) entirely practical
philosophical
Why for how
Why for why
23
Two kinds of FP

• Concrete Models (eg. pain, stress, interests)
• Broad understanding of man, world and its
  relationship(s)

24
Making sense of ourselves Folk Psychology is
part of an interdisciplinary Folk Theory of
Everything, i.e. a model of the self and the
world What is consciousness? Is there a
unitary self? Are my mental states caused (and
how)? Is there mental/agent causation? Do we have
free will? Is the universe deterministic, am I
determined? Are we morally accountable for our
decisions? Do we need free will to be morally
accountable?
25
FP image of man folk philosophy (of
mind) So, even if abundant in error gt
interesting enough to warrant further
investigation, not mere elimination. (Nicht
bloss Abgrenzungsfaktor, sondern eigenständiges
Objekt) Two Aims Understanding content What
do people think/believe about X? Understanding
processes Why do they think/believe that X?
26
Objectives of studying FP Understanding
content What do people think/believe about X?
Understanding processes Why do they
think/believe that X?
27
Q What do we really know about FP? A Very
little mainly assumptions. Q How to approach
FP?
A Collect all the platitudes regarding the
causal relations of mental states, sensory
stimuli, and motor responses. Add also all the
platitudes to the effect that one mental state
falls under another. Include only the platitudes
which are common knowledge amongst us everyone
knows them, everyone knows that everyone else
knows them, and so on. (Lewis 1972 256.)
28
Yet this is rarely done (if ever). Nonetheless,
FP is often referred to as a given. FP of
FP Intuitions about Intuitions entails Errors
about Errors
The guilty parties CogScientists Phil
osophers Experimental Psychologists
Mainly those who offer alternatives to FP
(elimination does not entail knowlegde of
all the details. Baby Bathtub)
29

• Zwischenbericht
• FP is part of a greater explanatory project.
• As such, there are a number of non-empirical
  questions addressed by FP.
• Especially the latter are not to be transcended,
  but to be understood these are the questions
  which make us, and scientists, tick.
• Here, FP and SP meet on equal terms FP-questions
  are the basic data for which we seek valid
  answers with SP.
• FP, then, is not only here to be eliminated, but
  to be understood.
• Yet we know surprisingly little about FP,
  content-wise.
• Q What to do?
• A Study FP with adequate methodologies!

30
(No Transcript)
31
Combining the best of two worlds Experimental
Philosophy -gt bears on traditional philosophy
and on FP  
The novelty is that experimental philosophers do
not so much borrow from the scientists as that
they become scientists. This they do by
designing and running experiments aimed to throw
light on philosophically interesting issues.
32
Experimental Philosophy It puts in question
what is or is not believed intuitively by people
generally. It challenges the coherence and truth
of beliefs that are generally held, ones
traditionally important in philosophy. Generates
more reliable data which allow for addressing the
process-question..
33
A Case Study The Problems of Free
Will, Determinism, Accountability. Concerned
Parties FPych, Fphil, SPsych, SPhil
34

• A three-fold Project
• Decriptive What is Folk View of Free Will?
• Substantive Does Folk View Free Will exist?
• Prescriptive How we should react, given the
  Free Will is X?

35
Basic Terms and Positions Determinism Every
event is an inevitable consequence of the prior
conditions and the natural laws. Indeterminism
Some events are open-ended, ie. the course of
events can be changed by some agents.
Incompatibilism Accountability entails
indeterminism entails free will entails free
will. Compatibilism Even if everything in the
world is determined, there is room for
accountability.
36
Incompatibilists People are not fully morally
responsible if determinism is true. Compatibilist
s Even if determinism is true our moral
responsibility is not undermined, for determinism
and moral responsibility are perfectly
consistent.
37

• The Philosophy and Psychology of Free Will
• In absence of better evidence (and what kind of
  evidence could
• there be?)
• appeal to intuitions
• appeal to effects of theory intuitions
• appeal to plausibility (again, intuitions)
• appeal to principle of generosity
• appeal to explanatory simplicity, incl. the 1st
  Person Perspective
• Appeal to Folk Philosophy of Mind

38
Examples
Robert Kane In my experience, most ordinary
persons start out as natural incompatibilists.
They believe there is some kind of conflict
between freedom and determinism and the idea
that freedom and responsibility might be
compatible with determinism looks to them as word
jugglery. (1999 217)
39
Laura Ekstrom We come to the table, nearly all
of us, as pretheoretic incompatibilists. (2002
310)
40
Galen Strawson The incompatibilist conception
of free will, though impossible to satisfy, is
just the kind of freedom that most people
ordinarily and unreflectively suppose themselves
to possess. It is in our nature to take
determinism to pose a serious problem for our
notions of responsibility and freedom. (1986
30).
41
Thomas Pink Most of us start off by making an
important assumption about freedom. Our freedom
of action, we naturally tend to assume, must be
incompatible with our actions being determined.
Therefore, the compatibilist needs a positive
argument in favor of the compatibility thesis
(2000 57)
42

• Why the appeal to folk intuitions in the free
  will debate?
• The aim is to develop a theory of freedom that is
  relevant to our ordinary beliefs about moral
  responsibility.
• Folk intuitions about retribution.
• Minimally, explain both why our intuitions are
  mistaken (content) and why we have those
  misleading intuitions in the first place
  (process).

43
A word on Incompatibilism More metaphysically
demanding than compatibilism gt (mental
causation plus free choice). Thus, needs
extraordinary evidence. But there is no way to
empirically decide about last substances.
Therefore the classical strategy appeal to
intuitions.  
44
An attempt to make the strategy more
explicit All else being equal, we should choose
the one that is less metaphysically demanding.
If this model is accepted, then
incompatibilists will have to insist that all
else is not equal. It is not clear how the
incompatibilist can establish this other than by
showing that incompatibilism simply does a better
job of preserving intuitionsthe right
intuitions, whichever ones those may bethan
compatibilism does. Suddenly, FP is no longer a
candidate for elimination. Rather, it serves as
basic datum.
45
By aligning their view with commonsense,
incompatibilists thereby place the burden of
proof on their opponents. But If it turns
out that incompatibilist theories are not nearly
as intuitive as incompatibilists themselves
assume -gt becomes increasingly difficult to
see why we should adopt these metaphysically
demanding theories.
46
So what evidence are incompatibilists
relying on when they talk about the wide-scale
intuitive plausibility of their theories?
47
But what evidence are incompatibilists
relying on when they talk about the wide-scale
intuitive plausibility of their theories?
Usually, it is the same evidence philosophers
typically give when they claim some idea is
intuitivenamely, that it is intuitive to them.
48
Whether or not incompatibilism is intuitive to
the majority of laypersons is a manifestly
empirical question. So, we suggest that the
free will debate calls for the kind of empirical
research on folk intuitions. gt Experimental
Philosophy
49
Another Road to ExPhil In/Compatibilism
Accountability Technical Term Personal
Ascriptions, Feeling,
Philosophy meets Folk Intuitions
50
The Empirical Questions 1. Do people believe in
an indeterministic universe?   2. Do people
believe in incompatibilism? (gt Note that
for non-philosophers, 1 and 2 are two different
questions.)  
51
The Empirical Questions 1. Do people believe in
an indeterministic universe?   2. Do people
believe in incompatibilism? (gt Note that
for non-philosophers, 1 and 2 are two different
questions.)  
52
Case Study There are two universes, A and B.
The key difference is that in Universe A, every
decision is completely caused by what happened
before the decision. Given the past, each
decision has to happen the way it does. By
contrast, in Universe B, decisions are not
completely caused by the past, and each human
decision does not have to happen the way it does.
  Q Which of these universes do you think is
most like ours?   .
53
Case Study There are two universes, A and B.
The key difference is that in Universe A, every
decision is completely caused by what happened
before the decision. Given the past, each
decision has to happen the way it does. By
contrast, in Universe B, decisions are not
completely caused by the past, and each human
decision does not have to happen the way it does.
  Q Which of these universes do you think is
most like ours?   A 88 say that universe B is
most like ours ie. that there is indeterminist
choice.
54
But ... Case Study 2 Imagine that in the next
century we discover all the laws of nature, and
we build a supercomputer which can deduce from
these laws of nature and from the current state
of everything in the world exactly what will be
happening in the world at any future time. It
can look at everything about the way the world is
and predict everything about how it will be with
100 accuracy. Suppose that such a supercomputer
looks at the state of the universe at a certain
time on March 25th, 2150 A.D., twenty years
before Jeremy Hall is born. The computer then
deduces from this information and the laws of
nature that Jeremy will definitely rob Fidelity
Bank at 600 PM on January 26th, 2195. As always,
the supercomputers prediction is correct Jeremy
robs Fidelity Bank at 600 PM on January 26th,
2195.
55
Case Study 2 Q Do you think that, when Jeremy
robs the bank, he acts of his own free will?   A
A significant majority (76) of participants
(non-philosophers) judged that Jeremy does act of
his own free will and THUS is responsible for his
act despite the deterministic flavour of his
universe. This is the position of compatiblism.
56
 
New experiments Made determinism more explicit,
still the same results. Conclusion People are
NOT intuitive incompatibilists.
57

• Amounts to considerable evidence for the falsity
  of the incompatibilist prediction that most
  ordinary people would judge that agents in a
  deterministic scenario do not act of their own
  free will and are not morally responsible.

58
Robert Kane In my experience, most ordinary
persons start out as natural incompatibilists.
(1999 217)
Laura Ekstrom We come to the table, nearly all
of us, as pretheoretic incompatibilists. (2002
310)
Galen Strawson It is in our nature to take
determinism to pose a serious problem for our
notions of responsibility and freedom. (1986
30).
Thomas Pink Therefore, the compatibilist needs
a positive argument in favor of the compatibility
thesis (2000 57)
59
Robert Kane In my experience, most ordinary
persons start out as natural incompatibilists.
(1999 217)
Wrong!
Laura Ekstrom We come to the table, nearly all
of us, as pretheoretic incompatibilists. (2002
310)
Galen Strawson It is in our nature to take
determinism to pose a serious problem for our
notions of responsibility and freedom. (1986
30).
Thomas Pink Therefore, the compatibilist needs
a positive argument in favor of the compatibility
thesis (2000 57)
60

• Q What does this mean?
• A
• If Incompabilitism partly rests on the claim that
  incompatibilism is intuitive, then pending
  evidence to the contrary, incompatibilism is not
  intuitive.
• The burden is now on incompatibilists why to
  propose a theory of free will that is more
  metaphysically demanding than ordinary intuitions
  demand.
• Minimally, the data show that people have
  conflicting intuitions about free will and that
  neither compatibilism nor incompatibilism is
  univocally intuitive this hardly provides reason
  to favor one theory over another.

61
Another look at the Compatibilism Debate
addresses another question, too What is FP
about? Theory-theory FP as predictive device
Understanding inner states. Is it really? -gt
Again, an empirical question.
62

• A Case Study on Side Effects
• Definition An outcome can be considered a
  side-effect when
• the agent was not specifically trying to bring it
  about but
• the agent chose to do something that she did or
  did not foresee would involve bringing it about.
• The question is Will people think that the agent
  brought about
• such an outcome intentionally?

63
Suppose that while mowing the lawn you
unwittingly destroy the last specimen of a
species of mushroom. Extinguishing a
species is by any account a bad thing. But if
you had no reason to believe that the lawn was a
home to an endangered species, it is plausible to
think that your action was not worthy of blame.
64
Suppose that while watering the lawn you
unknowingly save that same species of mushroom
from extinction. No doubt your action
was good. Yet it can hardly be said to be
worthy of praise, as you had no intention of
saving the mushroom.
65
FP-Theory-Theory If we know what an agent
believes, desires, intends, etc., we can make a
pretty good guess about what he or she will do
next. BUT Empirical findings do not sit well
with FP as a predictive device. FP is used not
only in making predictive judgments but also in
making moral judgments. Yet again FP of FP,
uninformed by empirical data.
66
The vice-president of a company went to the
chairman of the board and said, We are thinking
of starting a new program. It will help us
increase profits, but it will also harm the
environment. The chairman of the board
answered, I dont care at all about harming the
environment. I just want to make as much profit
as I can. Lets start the new program. They
started the new program. Sure enough, the
environment was harmed. Q Did the chairman of
the board intentionally harm the environment?
A Yes 83
67
The vice-president of a company went to the
chairman of the board and said, We are thinking
of starting a new program. It will help us
increase profits, and it will also help the
environment. The chairman of the board
answered, I dont care at all about helping the
environment. I just want to make as much profit
as I can. Lets start the new program. They
started the new program. Sure enough, the
environment was helped. Q Did the chairman of
the board intentionally help the environment?
A Yes 23
68
Should come as a surprise if we think of peoples
concept of intentional action (FP) merely as a
tool for predicting, controlling and explaining
behavior (e.g. eliminativism). The best way to
accomplish these scientific goals would be to
ignore all the moral issues and focus entirely on
a different sort of question (e.g., on questions
about the agents mental states).
69
Jake desperately wants to win the rifle contest.
He knows that he will only win the contest if he
hits the bulls-eye. He raises the rifle, gets the
bulls-eye in the sights, and presses the
trigger. But Jake isnt very good at using his
rifle. His hand slips on the barrel of the gun,
and the shot goes wild Nonetheless, the bullet
lands directly on the bulls-eye. Jake wins the
contest. Q Did Jake hit the target
intenionally? Is he praiseworthy? A 23 say
Yes.
70
Jake desperately wants to have more money. He
knows that he will inherit a lot of money when
his aunt dies. One day, he sees his aunt walking
by the window. He raises his rifle, gets her in
the sights, and presses the trigger. But Jake
isnt very good at using his rifle. His hand
slips on the barrel of the gun, and the shot goes
wild Nonetheless, the bullet hits her directly
in the heart. She dies instantly. Q Did Jake
kill his aunt intentionally? Is he
blameworthy? A 91 say Yes.
71
Folk Psychology of the Will and Responsibility
When we study these cases systematically, we
end up with a surprising result Peoples
intuitions appear to be influenced by the moral
qualities of the side-effect.
72
This phenomenon has important implications for
the study of praise and blame. It indicates
that there is no single way of combining
information about psychological features that can
be used to determine praise and blame for all
possible behaviors.
73

• Many aspects of folk psychology might be
  susceptible to a moral analysis.
• It might turn out that many other aspects of folk
  psychology are shaped in some important respect
  by a concern for issues of praise and blame.
• Also, the question of Incompatibilism vs.
  Compatibilism is seemingly relevantly unimportant
  to people.
• They still use the concept of praise and blame,
  and use it far more often than any FP
  theory-theory would suggest.

74
This yet another lesson which supports the
importance of the ExPhil Approach Role of FP
as a more general Folk Theory.
75

• Minimally, empirical data about folk intuitions
  should
• encourage philosophers to state more precisely
  whether or not they are interested in ordinary
  intuitions about free will and moral
  responsibility and why,
• prevent philosophers from appealing to the
  wide-scale intuitive plausibility of their
  theories unless these claims can be empirically
  substantiated, and
• encourage philosophers to re-examine some of
  their own assumptions concerning the role of
  intuitions in philosophy.

76
These observations reinforce a general
methodological point In order to show that
one theory preserves intuitions of a certain type
better than another, we must be fairly certain
exactly what the intuitions of those types
actually are.  
77
These observations reinforce a general
methodological point In order to show that
one theory preserves intuitions of a certain type
better than another, we must be fairly certain
exactly what the intuitions of those types
actually are. And in order to know these
intuitions, we have to study them systematically
and in a philosophy informed way. gt This is the
work and mission of Experimental Philosophy