Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Insa Lawler

Biographic Data

ID1176527
NAMEInsa Lawler
GIVEN NAMESInsa
FAMILY NAMELawler
SIGNATURELAWLER I
AFFILIATIONSUniversity of North Carolina at Greensboro
ORCID0000-0002-1250-6020
VERIFIEDYes
TOTAL WORKS9
TOTAL CITATIONS13
AUTHOR COUNT9
EDITOR COUNT0
FIRST PUBLICATION YEAR2019
LATEST PUBLICATION YEAR2024
H-INDEX1
  • What is philosophical progress

    Open Access•Finnur Dellsén, Tina Firing et al.•ARTICLE•Philosophy and Phenomenological…•2024•References: 1

    What is it for philosophy to make progress? While various putative forms of philosophical progress have been explored in some depth, this overarching question is rarely addressed explicitly, perhaps because it has been assumed to be intractable or unlikely to have a single, unified answer. In this paper, we aim to show that the question is tractable, that it does admit of a single, unified answer, and that one such answer is plausible. This answe…

  • Would Disagreement Undermine Progress

    Finnur Dellsén, Insa Lawler et al.•ARTICLE•The Journal of Philosophy•2023

    In recent years, several philosophers have argued that their discipline makes no progress (or not enough in comparison to the “hard sciences”). A key argument for this pessimistic position appeals to the purported fact that philosophers widely and systematically disagree on most major philosophical issues. In this paper, we take a step back from the debate about progress in philosophy specifically and consider the general question: How (if at all…

  • Thinking about Progress

    Open Access•Finnur Dellsén, Insa Lawler et al.•ARTICLE•Noûs•2022

    Is there progress in philosophy? If so, how much? Philosophers have recently argued for a wide range of answers to these questions, from the view that there is no progress whatsoever to the view that philosophy has provided answers to all the big philosophical questions. However, these views are difficult to compare and evaluate, because they rest on very different assumptions about the conditions under which philosophy would make progress. This …

  • Scientific Understanding and Representation

    Kareem Khalifa, Insa Lawler et al.•BOOK•Scientific Understanding and…•2022

  • Scientific understanding and felicitous legitimate falsehoods

    Open Access•Insa Lawler•ARTICLE•Synthese•2021•Cited by: 10•References: 63

  • Multi-modal meaning

    Open Access•Hannes Rieser, Insa Lawler•ARTICLE•Semantics and Pragmatics•2020

    Humans communicate with different modalities. We offer an account of multi-modal meaning coordination, taking speech-gesture meaning coordination as a prototypical case. We argue that temporal synchrony (plus prosody) does not determine how to coordinate speech meaning and gesture meaning. Challenging cases are asynchrony and broadcasting cases, which are illustrated with empirical data. We propose that a process algebra account satisfies the des…

  • Philosophical methods under scrutiny

    Open Access•Anna‐Maria A Eder, Anna-Maria A Eder et al.•ARTICLE•Synthese•2020•Cited by: 1•References: 33

  • Understanding why, knowing why, and cognitive achievements

    Open Access•Insa Lawler•ARTICLE•Synthese•2019•Cited by: 1•References: 42

  • Levels of Reasons Why and Answers to Why Questions

    Open Access•Insa Lawler•ARTICLE•Philosophy of Science•2019•Cited by: 1•References: 14

    According to Skow, correct answers to why questions cite only causes or grounds, but not nonaccidental regularities. Accounts that cite nonaccidental regularities typically confuse second-level reasons with first-level reasons. Only causes and grounds are first-level reasons why. Nonaccidental regularities are second-level reasons why. I first show that Skow’s arguments for the accusation of confusion depend on the independent thesis that only ci…

  • Scientific understanding and felicitous legitimate falsehoods

    Open Access•Insa Lawler•ARTICLE•Synthese•2021•Cited by: 10•References: 63

  • Philosophical methods under scrutiny

    Open Access•Anna‐Maria A Eder, Anna-Maria A Eder et al.•ARTICLE•Synthese•2020•Cited by: 1•References: 33

  • Understanding why, knowing why, and cognitive achievements

    Open Access•Insa Lawler•ARTICLE•Synthese•2019•Cited by: 1•References: 42

  • Levels of Reasons Why and Answers to Why Questions

    Open Access•Insa Lawler•ARTICLE•Philosophy of Science•2019•Cited by: 1•References: 14

    According to Skow, correct answers to why questions cite only causes or grounds, but not nonaccidental regularities. Accounts that cite nonaccidental regularities typically confuse second-level reasons with first-level reasons. Only causes and grounds are first-level reasons why. Nonaccidental regularities are second-level reasons why. I first show that Skow’s arguments for the accusation of confusion depend on the independent thesis that only ci…

  • Understanding why, knowing why, and cognitive achievements

    Open Access•Insa Lawler•ARTICLE•Synthese•2019•Cited by: 1•References: 42

  • Levels of Reasons Why and Answers to Why Questions

    Open Access•Insa Lawler•ARTICLE•Philosophy of Science•2019•Cited by: 1•References: 14

    According to Skow, correct answers to why questions cite only causes or grounds, but not nonaccidental regularities. Accounts that cite nonaccidental regularities typically confuse second-level reasons with first-level reasons. Only causes and grounds are first-level reasons why. Nonaccidental regularities are second-level reasons why. I first show that Skow’s arguments for the accusation of confusion depend on the independent thesis that only ci…

  • Multi-modal meaning

    Open Access•Hannes Rieser, Insa Lawler•ARTICLE•Semantics and Pragmatics•2020

    Humans communicate with different modalities. We offer an account of multi-modal meaning coordination, taking speech-gesture meaning coordination as a prototypical case. We argue that temporal synchrony (plus prosody) does not determine how to coordinate speech meaning and gesture meaning. Challenging cases are asynchrony and broadcasting cases, which are illustrated with empirical data. We propose that a process algebra account satisfies the des…

  • Philosophical methods under scrutiny

    Open Access•Anna‐Maria A Eder, Anna-Maria A Eder et al.•ARTICLE•Synthese•2020•Cited by: 1•References: 33

  • Scientific understanding and felicitous legitimate falsehoods

    Open Access•Insa Lawler•ARTICLE•Synthese•2021•Cited by: 10•References: 63

  • Thinking about Progress

    Open Access•Finnur Dellsén, Insa Lawler et al.•ARTICLE•Noûs•2022

    Is there progress in philosophy? If so, how much? Philosophers have recently argued for a wide range of answers to these questions, from the view that there is no progress whatsoever to the view that philosophy has provided answers to all the big philosophical questions. However, these views are difficult to compare and evaluate, because they rest on very different assumptions about the conditions under which philosophy would make progress. This …

  • Scientific Understanding and Representation

    Kareem Khalifa, Insa Lawler et al.•BOOK•Scientific Understanding and…•2022

  • Would Disagreement Undermine Progress

    Finnur Dellsén, Insa Lawler et al.•ARTICLE•The Journal of Philosophy•2023

    In recent years, several philosophers have argued that their discipline makes no progress (or not enough in comparison to the “hard sciences”). A key argument for this pessimistic position appeals to the purported fact that philosophers widely and systematically disagree on most major philosophical issues. In this paper, we take a step back from the debate about progress in philosophy specifically and consider the general question: How (if at all…

  • What is philosophical progress

    Open Access•Finnur Dellsén, Tina Firing et al.•ARTICLE•Philosophy and Phenomenological…•2024•References: 1

    What is it for philosophy to make progress? While various putative forms of philosophical progress have been explored in some depth, this overarching question is rarely addressed explicitly, perhaps because it has been assumed to be intractable or unlikely to have a single, unified answer. In this paper, we aim to show that the question is tractable, that it does admit of a single, unified answer, and that one such answer is plausible. This answe…

Epistemology (7 works) · Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics (7 works) · Philosophy (7 works) · Philosophy and History of Science (5 works) · Philosophy of science (5 works) · Metaphysics (3 works) · Philosophy and Theoretical Science (3 works) · Philosophy of language (3 works) · Psychology (3 works) · Argument (complex analysis) (2 works)

Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae