What is philosophical intuition? How is it different from common sense?
December 28, 2005
Response from Nicholas D. Smith on December 29, 2005
I suspect that "philosophical intuition" really has something to do with one's capacities to do logical and analytical reasoning. But your question really depends upon what you mean by "intuition." Plenty of the most significant and controversial philosophical theories would not qualify in anyone's view as common sensical (consider Plato's theory of Forms, Berkeley's immaterialism, Quine's nominalism), but the brilliant philosophers who arrived at these theories applied their talents and capacities in developing them. If it is these talents and capacities (which I suspect are both natural in their basis, but also highly developable into their fullest realization) are what you mean by "intuition," then "philosophical intuition" is certainly not the same thing as common sense. Moreover, from many years of observation, I can say with certainty (and with some personal embarrassment over being an exemplar of the sort of thing I am about to note) that there seems often to be little correlation between a philosopher's ability to do excellent work in the field, all the while failing on a daily basis to exemplify good common sense in one or more of one's more mundane enterprises. Ever since Thales fell into that well, many of us would not do well if the necessary condition of success were excellence in the area of common sense!
If you provide your e-mail address, you will be automatically notified whenever this question receives a response. Your e-mail address will not be used for any other purpose, and it will not be given or sold to anyone.
I suspect that "philosophical intuition" really has something to do with one's capacities to do logical and analytical reasoning. But your question really depends upon what you mean by "intuition." Plenty of the most significant and controversial philosophical theories would not qualify in anyone's view as common sensical (consider Plato's theory of Forms, Berkeley's immaterialism, Quine's nominalism), but the brilliant philosophers who arrived at these theories applied their talents and capacities in developing them. If it is these talents and capacities (which I suspect are both natural in their basis, but also highly developable into their fullest realization) are what you mean by "intuition," then "philosophical intuition" is certainly not the same thing as common sense. Moreover, from many years of observation, I can say with certainty (and with some personal embarrassment over being an exemplar of the sort of thing I am about to note) that there seems often to be little correlation between a philosopher's ability to do excellent work in the field, all the while failing on a daily basis to exemplify good common sense in one or more of one's more mundane enterprises. Ever since Thales fell into that well, many of us would not do well if the necessary condition of success were excellence in the area of common sense!