Thought experiments as a pedagogical resource for teaching of Philosophy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5902/2448065741280Keywords:
Teaching of Philosophy, thought experiments, pedagogical resource, mental models.Abstract
The paper analyses a widely used tool in philosophical methodology, thought experiments. Thought experiments are narratives that invite the reader to imagine and evaluate a hypothetical situation. They are used in philosophical inquiry to clarify a certain conception, and even to support or refute some theory. However, could this research tool also be used as a pedagogical resource in Philosophy classes? The aim of this paper will be to support a positive answer to this question. For this, I present Nancy J. Nersessian’s perspective on the reasoning involved in thought experimenting, which is based on mental models perspective, to support the hypothesis that thought experiments can be used as pedagogical resources in the teaching of Philosophy.
Downloads
References
BROWN, James Robert. Laboratory of the Mind: Thought Experiments in the Natural Sciences. New York: Routledge, 1991a.
BROWN, James Robert. Thought Experiments: A Platonic Account. In: T. Horowitz and G. Massey (eds.), Thought Experiments in Science and Philosophy. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 1991b, p. 119-128.
CHALMERS, David. The Conscious Mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996.
CRAIK, Kenneth. The Nature of Explanation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1943.
FOOT, Philippa. The problem of abortion and the doctrine of the double effect. In: FOOT, Philippa: Virtues and Vices and Other Essays in Moral Philosophy. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1978.
GENDLER, Tamar Szabó. Imaginary Exceptions: On the Powers and Limits of Thought Experiment. Dissertation. Harvard, New York: Garland Press, 1996.
GENDLER, Tamar Szabó. Intuition, Imagination, and Philosophical Methodology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010.
GETTIER, Edmund. Is justified true belief knowledge?. Analysis, v. 23, 1963, p. 121–123.
JACKSON, Frank. Epiphenomenal Qualia. Philosophical Quartely, v.32, 1982, p.127-136.
JOHNSON-LAIRD, Philip. Mental Models. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1983.
KUHN, Thomas. A Function for Thought Experiments. In: KUHN, Thomas: The Essential Tension, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1977.
MACH, Ernst. Über Gedankenexperimente. Zeitschrift für physikalischen und chemischen Unterricht, v. 10, 1897, p.1-5.
MURCHO, Desidério. A Natureza da Filosofia e o seu ensino. Educação e Filosofia, Uberlândia, v. 22, n. 44, 2008, p. 79-99.
NERSESSIAN, Nancy J. In the theoretician’s laboratory: Thought experimenting as mental modeling. Philosophy of Science Association, v. 2, 1992, p. 291-301.
NERSESSIAN, Nancy J. Cognitive Science, Mental Modeling, and Thought Experiments. In: The Routledge Companion to Thought Experiments. New York: Routledge, 2018. p. 309-326.
NORTON, John. Are Thought Experiments Just What You Thought?. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, v. 26, 1996, p. 333-366.
NORTON, John. On Thought Experiments: Is There More to the Argument?. Philosophy of Science, v. 71, n. 5, 2004, p. 1139-1151.
ØRSTED, Hans Christian. Förste Indledning til den Almindelige Naturlaere, et indbydelsesskrivt til forelaesninger over denne vindenskab, (1811). Copenhagen (German translation): Über Geist und Studium der allgemeinen Naturlehre, In: Gehlens Journal für Chemie und Physik, vol. 36 (1822), p. 458-488.
PUTNAM, Hilary. The meaning of ‘meaning’. In: GUNDERSON, K. (Ed.). Language, mind and knowledge. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1975, p. 131-93.
RAWLS, John. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge: Belknap Press, 1971.
SEARLE, John R. Minds, Brains and Programs. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, v.3, n. 3, 1980, p. 417-457.
STUART, Michael T; FEHIGE, Yiftach; BROWN, James Robert. In: The Routledge Companion to Thought Experiments. New York: Routledge, 2018.
THOMSON, Judith. A defense of abortion. Philosophy & Public Affairs, v. 1, n. 1, 1971. p. 47-66.
THOMSON, Judith. The trolley problem. The Yale Law Journal, 1985, v. 94, n. 6, p. 1395-1415.
