Elijah Chudnoff
University of Miami
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Elijah Chudnoff.
Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines | 2017
Bartek Chomanski; Elijah Chudnoff
Abstract “The Epistemic Significance of Perceptual Learning” defends the view that perceptual experiences generate justification in virtue of their presentational phenomenology, preserve past justification in virtue of the influence of perceptual learning on them, and thereby allow new beliefs formed on their basis to also be partly based on that past justification. “The Real Epistemic Significance of Perceptual Learning” mounts challenges to these three claims. Here we explore some avenues for responding to those challenges.
Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines | 2017
Elijah Chudnoff
Abstract First impressions suggest the following contrast between perception and memory: perception generates new beliefs and reasons, justification, or evidence for those beliefs; memory preserves old beliefs and reasons, justification, or evidence for those beliefs. In this paper, I argue that reflection on perceptual learning gives us reason to adopt an alternative picture on which perception plays both generative and preservative epistemic roles.
Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines | 2016
Elijah Chudnoff
Abstract According to current methodological orthodoxy philosophers rely on intuitions about thought experiments to refute general claims about the nature of knowledge, freedom, thought, reference, justice, beauty, etc. Philosophers working under the banner of ‘negative experimental philosophy’ have criticized more traditional philosophers for relying on this method. They argue that intuitions about thought experiments are influenced by factors that are irrelevant to the truth of their contents. Cappelen and Deutsch defend traditional philosophy against this critique by rejecting the picture of philosophical methodology it presupposes: philosophers do not really rely on intuitions. In this paper, I defend methodological orthodoxy by arguing that philosophers must rely on intuitions somewhere and that they do in fact often rely on intuitions about thought experiments. I also argue in favor of a reply to the negative experimental critique that is similar to at least part of Deutsch’s own.
Dialectica | 2011
Elijah Chudnoff
Philosophical Studies | 2011
Elijah Chudnoff
Philosophy and Phenomenological Research | 2011
Elijah Chudnoff
Noûs | 2013
Elijah Chudnoff
Philosophy and Phenomenological Research | 2015
Elijah Chudnoff
Pacific Philosophical Quarterly | 2015
Elijah Chudnoff; David Didomenico
Philosophy and Phenomenological Research | 2018
Elijah Chudnoff