Here are mine:
A priori knowledge: yes or no? Probably, leaning towards yes (edited)
Abstract objects: Platonism or nominalism? nominalism
Aesthetic value: objective or subjective? subjective
Analytic-synthetic distinction: yes or no? No
Epistemic justification: internalism or externalism? Externalism
External world: idealism, skepticism, or non-skeptical realism? Non-skeptical realism (but sometimes I secretly hope for skepticism)
Free will: compatibilism, libertarianism, or no free will? Split between no free will and compatibilism.
God: theism or atheism? Atheism
Knowledge: empiricism or rationalism? Empiricism
Knowledge claims: contextualism, relativism, or invariantism? Contextualism
Laws of nature: Humean or non-Humean? Humean
Logic: classical or non-classical? Non-classical (<3 fuzzy logic and modal logic)
Mental content: internalism or externalism? Externalism
Meta-ethics: moral realism or moral anti-realism? Moral anti-realism
Metaphilosophy: naturalism or non-naturalism? Naturalism
Mind: physicalism or non-physicalism? Physicalism
Moral judgment: cognitivism or non-cognitivism? Non-cognitivism
Moral motivation: internalism or externalism? Externalism
Newcomb’s problem: one box or two boxes? One box
Normative ethics: deontology, consequentialism, or virtue ethics? Consequentialism
Perceptual experience: disjunctivism, qualia theory, representationalism, or sense-datum theory? Probably representationalism
Personal identity: biological view, psychological view, or further-fact view? Probably psychological, but it has its flaws
Politics: communitarianism, egalitarianism, or libertarianism? Libertarianism
Proper names: Fregean or Millian? Fregean
Science: scientific realism or scientific anti-realism? Scientific realism
Teletransporter (new matter): survival or death? Death
Time: A-theory or B-theory? Leaning towards B-theory
Trolley problem (five straight ahead, one on side track, turn requires switching, what ought one do?): switch or don’t switch? Switch
Truth: correspondence, deflationary, or epistemic? Correspondence
Zombies: inconceivable, conceivable but not metaphysically possible, or metaphysically possible? conceivable but not metaphysically possible
===
And for philosophers I identify with: Probably Nietzsche, Hume, and Russell.
Glad to see some respect for Nietzsche around here. I don’t think most people truly understand what this philosopher was about.
Ah yes, I definitely agree with you. I don’t think of Nietzsche as a philosopher—rather—I think of him more as a social analyst with penetrating insight.
Here are mine:
A priori knowledge: yes or no? Probably, leaning towards yes (edited)
Abstract objects: Platonism or nominalism? nominalism
Aesthetic value: objective or subjective? subjective
Analytic-synthetic distinction: yes or no? No
Epistemic justification: internalism or externalism? Externalism
External world: idealism, skepticism, or non-skeptical realism? Non-skeptical realism (but sometimes I secretly hope for skepticism)
Free will: compatibilism, libertarianism, or no free will? Split between no free will and compatibilism.
God: theism or atheism? Atheism
Knowledge: empiricism or rationalism? Empiricism
Knowledge claims: contextualism, relativism, or invariantism? Contextualism
Laws of nature: Humean or non-Humean? Humean
Logic: classical or non-classical? Non-classical (<3 fuzzy logic and modal logic)
Mental content: internalism or externalism? Externalism
Meta-ethics: moral realism or moral anti-realism? Moral anti-realism
Metaphilosophy: naturalism or non-naturalism? Naturalism
Mind: physicalism or non-physicalism? Physicalism
Moral judgment: cognitivism or non-cognitivism? Non-cognitivism
Moral motivation: internalism or externalism? Externalism
Newcomb’s problem: one box or two boxes? One box
Normative ethics: deontology, consequentialism, or virtue ethics? Consequentialism
Perceptual experience: disjunctivism, qualia theory, representationalism, or sense-datum theory? Probably representationalism
Personal identity: biological view, psychological view, or further-fact view? Probably psychological, but it has its flaws
Politics: communitarianism, egalitarianism, or libertarianism? Libertarianism
Proper names: Fregean or Millian? Fregean
Science: scientific realism or scientific anti-realism? Scientific realism
Teletransporter (new matter): survival or death? Death
Time: A-theory or B-theory? Leaning towards B-theory
Trolley problem (five straight ahead, one on side track, turn requires switching, what ought one do?): switch or don’t switch? Switch
Truth: correspondence, deflationary, or epistemic? Correspondence
Zombies: inconceivable, conceivable but not metaphysically possible, or metaphysically possible? conceivable but not metaphysically possible
===
And for philosophers I identify with: Probably Nietzsche, Hume, and Russell.
Glad to see some respect for Nietzsche around here. I don’t think most people truly understand what this philosopher was about.
Ah yes, I definitely agree with you. I don’t think of Nietzsche as a philosopher—rather—I think of him more as a social analyst with penetrating insight.