tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-33353836520381354782007-12-07T13:52:00.000-05:002007-12-07T13:52:00.000-05:00Hi Christopher, I guess I see a lot of questions as having a scientific (empirical) component and a philosophical (interpretive) component. Applying this to your example, it is not a philosophical issue whether certain brain abnormalities cause one to make such-and-such judgments. It's a philosophical question whether said judgments are properly described as <I>moral</I> judgments, though. But this is no longer a question that's directly susceptible to empirical evidence.<BR/><BR/>Similarly, you might empirically test whether humans have brain states of type X. But it's a matter of pure philosophy whether brain states of type X are properly understood as intentional states!<BR/><BR/>(See also my old post: <A HREF="http://www.philosophyetc.net/2007/04/does-philosophy-need-science.html" REL="nofollow">Does philosophy need science?</A>)Richardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16725218276285291235noreply@blogger.com