Skip to main content Accessibility help
What Philosophers Know
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 29
  • Export citation
  • Recommend to librarian
  • Buy the print book

Book description

Philosophy has never delivered on its promise to settle the great moral and religious questions of human existence, and even most philosophers conclude that it does not offer an established body of disciplinary knowledge. Gary Gutting challenges this view by examining detailed case studies of recent achievements by analytic philosophers such as Quine, Kripke, Gettier, Lewis, Chalmers, Plantinga, Kuhn, Rawls, and Rorty. He shows that these philosophers have indeed produced a substantial body of disciplinary knowledge, but he challenges many common views about what philosophers have achieved. Topics discussed include the role of argument in philosophy, naturalist and experimentalist challenges to the status of philosophical intuitions, the importance of pre-philosophical convictions, Rawls' method of reflective equilibrium, and Rorty's challenge to the idea of objective philosophical truth. The book offers a lucid survey of recent analytic work and presents a new understanding of philosophy as an important source of knowledge.


‘This series of case studies of problems and advances in philosophical thinking argues effectively that philosophy can make progress and that philosophers do have distinctive substantial knowledge. The treatment is excellent: sophisticated and of interest to experts while also clearly-written and engaging for readers generally.’

David Sosa - University of Texas at Austin

Refine List

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Send to Kindle
  • Send to Dropbox
  • Send to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.


Audi, Robert, The Good and the Right: A Theory of Intuition and Intrinsic Value, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2004.
Bealer, George, “Intuitions and the Autonomy of Philosophy,” in DePaul, and Ramsey, (eds.), 201–39.
Burge, Tyler, “Logic and Analyticity,” Grazer Philosophische Studien 66 (2003), 199–249.
Burgess, John, “Quine, Analyticity and Philosophy of Mathematics,” Philosophical Quarterly 54 (2004), 38–55.
Chalmers, David, The Conscious Mind, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996.
Chalmers, David,“Phenomenal Concepts and the Knowledge Argument,” in Ludlow, P., Nagasawa, Y., and Stoljar, D. (eds.), There's Something about Mary, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2004, 269–98.
Chalmers, David, “The Two-Dimensional Argument Against Materialism,” in his The Character of Consciousness, Oxford: Oxford University Press, forthcoming (a draft is available on Chalmers' website at
Chomsky, Noam, Review of Verbal Behavior, Language 35 (1959), 26–58.
Clark, Michael, “Knowledge and Grounds: A Comment on Mr. Gettier's Paper,” Analysis 24(2) (1963), 46–8.
Creath, Richard (ed.), Dear Carnap, Dear Van: The Quine–Carnap Correspondence and Related Work, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990.
Cummins, Robert, “Reflections on Reflective Equilibrium,” in DePaul, and Ramsey, (eds), 113–27.
Daniels, Norman, “Wide Reflective Equilibrium and Theory Acceptance in Ethics,” Journal of Philosophy 76 (1979), 256–82.
Davidson, Donals, “Quine's Externalism,”Grazer Philosophische Studien, 66 (2003), 281–97.
Dennett, Daniel, “The Zombic Hunch: Extinction of an Intuition?,” in O'Hear, A. (ed.), Philosophy at the New Millennium, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001, 27–43.
DePaul, Michael R., “Reflective Equilibrium and Foundationalism,” American Philosophical Quarterly 23 (1986), 59–69.
DePaul, Michael R.,“Why Bother with Reflective Equilibrium?,” in DePaul, and Ramsey, (eds.), 293–309.
DePaul, M. R. and Ramsey, W. (eds.), Rethinking Intuition: The Psychology of Intuition and Its Role in Philosophical Inquiry, Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 1998.
DeRose, Keith, “Plantinga, Presumption, Possibility and the Problem of Evil,” Canadian Journal of Philosophy 21 (1990), 497–512.
Evans, Gareth, “The Causal Theory of Names,” Collected Papers, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985.
Fitch, G. W., Saul Kripke, Montreal: McGill Queen's University Press, 2004.
Flew, Anthony and MacIntyre, Alasdair (eds.), New Essays in Philosophical Theology, London: Macmillan, 1955.
Fodor, Jerry, “Water's Water Everywhere,” London Review of Books, October 21, 2004.
Frankfurt, Harry, “Alternate Possibilities and Moral Responsibility,” Journal of Philosophy 66 (1969), 829–39.
Friedman, Michael, “Kuhn and Logical Empiricism,” in Nickles, Thomas (ed.), Thomas Kuhn, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003, 19–44.
Gettier, Edmund, “Is Justified True Belief Knowledge?,” Analysis 23 (1963), 121–3.
Gibson, Roger F. (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Quine, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.
Giere, Ronald, “Kuhn's Legacy for North American Philosophy of Science,” Social Studies of Science 27 (1997), 496–8.
Glock, H.-J., Glürt, K., and Keil, G. (eds.), Fifty Years of Quine's “Two Dogmas” (Grazer Philosophische Studien 66 [2003]), 1. Also published as a book by Rodopi, 2003.
Goldman, Alvin, “A Causal Theory of Knowing,” Journal of Philosophy 64 (1967), 335–72.
Goldman, Alvin,“What is Justified Belief?,” in Pappas, George (ed.), Justification and Knowledge, Dordrecht: Reidel, 1979, 1–23.
Grice, H. P. and Strawson, P. F., “In Defense of a Dogma,” Philosophical Review 55 (1956), 141–58.
Gutting, Gary, Pragmatic Liberalism and the Critique of Modernity, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.
Hardcastle, Valerie Gray, “The Why of Consciousness: A Non-Issue for Materialists,” in Shear, Jonathan (ed.), Explaining Consciousness – The “Hard Problem,”Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1997, 61–8.
Hoyningen-Huene, Paul and Sankey, Howard (eds.), Incommensurability and Related Matters, Boston: Kluwer, 2001.
Hughes, Christopher, Kripke: Names, Necessity, and Identity, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004.
Jackson, Frank, From Metaphysics to Ethics: A Defense of Conceptual Analysis, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998.
Jackson, Frank,“Reference and Description Revisited,” in Tomberlin, J. (ed.), Philosophical Perspectives 12: Language, Mind, and Ontology, Oxford: Blackwell, 1998, 201–18.
Katz, Jerrold, “Names without Bearers,” The Philosophical Review 103 (1994), 1–39.
Kim, Jaegwon, “The Mind–Body Problem at Century's Turn,” in Leiter, Brian (ed.), The Future for Philosophy, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004, 129–52.
Kirk, Robert, “Zombies v. Materialists,” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Vol. 48 (1974), 135–52.
Kitcher, Philip, “Theories, Theorists and Theoretical Change,” The Philosophical Review 87 (1978), 519–47.
Klein, Peter, “A Proposed Definition of Propositional Knowledge,” Journal of Philosophy 68 (1971), 471–82.
Kripke, Saul, Naming and Necessity, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1980.
Kuhn, Thomas, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, second edition, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970 [first published 1962].
Lakatos, I. and Musgrave, A. (eds.), Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970.
Laudan, Laurens, Progress and Its Problems: Toward a Theory of Scientific Growth, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1978.
Lewis, David, “Are We Free to Break the Laws?,” in his Philosophical Papers, Volume II, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986, 291–8.
Lewis, David,“Elusive Knowledge,” Australasian Journal of Philosophy 74 (1996), 549–67.
Loar, Brian, “Phenomenal States (Revised),” in Ludlow, P., Nagasawa, Y., and Stoljar, D. (eds.), There's Something about Mary, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2004, 219–39.
Lycan, William, “Definition in a Quinean World,” in Fetzer, J., Shatz, D., and Schlesinger, G. (eds.), Definitions and Definability: Philosophical Perspectives, Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1991, 111–31.
Lycan, William,“On the Gettier Problem Problem,” Hetherington, in Stephen (ed.), Epistemology Futures, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006, 148–68.
Machery, E., Mallon, R., Nichols, S., and Stich, S., “Semantics Cross-Cultural Style,” Cognition 92 (2004), B1–B12.
Mackie, J. L., The Miracle of Theism, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1982.
Martin, Michael, Atheism: A Philosophical Justification, Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1990.
McDowell, John, “Towards Rehabilitating Objectivity,” in Brandom, Robert B. (ed.), Rorty and His Critics, Oxford: Blackwell, 2000, 109–23.
McGinn, Colin, “Can We Solve the Mind–Body Problem?,” Mind, New Series, 98 (1989), 349–66.
Nagel, Thomas, “Conceiving the Impossible and the Mind–Body Problem,” Philosophy 73 (1998), 337–52.
Nagel, Thomas, “What Is It Like to Be a Bat?,” The Philosophical Review 83 (1974), 435–50.
Pickering, Andrew, Constructing Quarks: A Sociological History of Particle Physics, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1984.
Plantinga, Alvin, God and Other Minds, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1967.
Plantinga, Alvin, The Nature of Necessity, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1974.
Plantinga, Alvin, Warranted Christian Belief, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.
Putnam, Hilary, “The Analytic and the Synthetic,” in his Mind, Language, and Reality, Philosophical Papers, Volume II, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975. [First published 1962.]
Putnam, Hilary, “The Greatest Logical Positivist,” in his Realism with a Human Face, ed. Conant, James, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1990.
Putnam, Hilary, Reason, Truth, and History, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981.
Quine, W. V. O., “Two Dogmas of Empiricism,” in his From a Logical Point of View, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1953.
Quine, W. V., “Two Dogmas in Retrospect,” Canadian Journal of Philosophy 21 (1991), 265–74.
Quine, W. V. O, Word and Object, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1960.
Rawls, John, Political Liberalism, New York: Columbia University Press, 1993.
Rawls, John, A Theory of Justice, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1971.
Richard, Rorty, “Response to John McDowell,” in Brandom, R. (ed.), Rorty and His Critics, Oxford: Blackwell, 2000, 123–8.
Rorty, Richard, “An Imaginative Philosopher: The Legacy of W. V. Quine” [obituary notice], Chronicle of Higher Education, February 2, 2001.
Rorty, Richard, Objectivity, Relativism, and Truth, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990.
Rorty, Richard, Philosophy as Cultural Politics (Philosophical Papers, Volume IV), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007.
Rorty, Richard, Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1979.
Salmon, Nathan, Reference and Essence, Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1982, 23–31.
Israel, Scheffler, Science and Subjectivity, Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1967.
Samuel, Scheffler, “Rawls and Utilitarianism,” in Freeman, Samuel (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Rawls, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
Searle, John, Intentionality: An Essay in the Philosophy of Mind, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983.
Shapere, Dudley, “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions,” The Philosophical Review 73 (1964), 383–94.
Shope, Robert K., The Analysis of Knowledge, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1983.
Shope, Robert K., “Conditions and Analyses of Knowing,” in Moser, Paul (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Epistemology, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002, 25–70
Singer, Peter, “Philosophers Are Back on the Job,” The New York Times Magazine, July 7, 1974, 6–7; 17–20.
Soames, Scott, Philosophical Analysis in the Twentieth Century, Volume I: The Dawn of Analysis, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2003.
Soames, ScottPhilosophical Analysis in the Twentieth Century, Volume II: The Age of Meaning, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2003.
Sosa, E. and Kim, J. (eds.), Epistemology: An Anthology, Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2000, 340–53.
Stoljar, Daniel, “Physicalism,” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (online),
Swoyer, Chris, “How Ontology Might Be Possible: Explanation and Inference in Metaphysics,” Midwest Studies in Philosophy XXIII (1999), 100–31.
Inwagen, Peter, An Essay on Free Will, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1983.
Inwagen, Peter, “Freedom to Break the Laws,” Midwest Studies in Philosophy XXVIII (2004), 334–50
Inwagen, Peter, “Free Will Remains a Mystery,” in Kane, Robert (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Free Will, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002, 158–77.
Inwagen, Peter, “The Incompatibility of Free Will and Determinism,” Philosophical Studies 27 (1975), 185–99.
Weatherson, Brian, “What Good Are Counterexamples?,” Philosophical Studies 115 (2003), 1–31.
Weinberg, J., Nichols, S., and Stich, S., “Normativity and Epistemic Intuitions,” Philosophical Topics 29 (2001), 429–60.
Whitehead, Alfred North, Adventures of Ideas, New York: Free Press, 1967 [first published 1933].
Williams, Bernard, Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1985.
Williamson, Timothy, The Philosophy of Philosophy, Oxford: Blackwell, 2007.
Zammito, John H., A Nice Derangement of Epistemes: Post-Positivism in the Study of Science from Quine to Latour, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2004.
Zimmerman, Dean, “Materialism and Survival,” in Stump, E. and Murray, M. (eds.), Philosophy of Religion: The Big Questions, Oxford: Blackwell, 1999, 379–86.


Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Book summary page views

Total views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between #date#. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed.