Abstract
I explore the question of whether one has to reply to a paper such as this, and consider what a positive answer (in any respect) would teach us. I argue for a qualified Yes. By “reply” I refer to an attempt to write a paper responding to the original one, which addresses (some of) the major claims made in it. I first ask what philosophical papers are for, and note the important role played by replies to them. I consider special obligations to reply to philosophical papers; and the weaker pro tanto obligations that might exist for most professional philosophers. Finally, I consider objections to my claims; and the broader implications if my case is plausible.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1361-1368 |
| Number of pages | 8 |
| Journal | Philosophia (United States) |
| Volume | 49 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Sep 2021 |
Bibliographical note
Funding Information:I am very grateful to Aaron Ben-Zeev, David Enoch, Amihud Gilead, Meir Hemmo, Arnon Keren, Iddo Landau, Sam Lebens, Ariel Meirav, Alma Smilansky-Teichner, Daniel Statman, Rivka Weinberg, and an anonymous referee for this journal, for helpful comments on drafts of the paper.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020, The Author(s).
Keywords
- Norms of assertion
- Philosophical replies
- Professional responsibility
- Progress in philosophy
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Philosophy