1 Philosophical Heuristics and Philosophical Methodology

Introduction Metaphilosophy is all the rage nowadays. Philosophers are becoming increasingly self-conscious about their methodology, as this volume showcases. And rightly so—it is part of our job description to put thinking under the microscope, and that obviously should include our philosophical thinking. Much as we want philosophers of physics, of biology, of mathematics, and so on to scrutinize those respective disciplines, so we want philosophers of philosophy to scrutinize ours. When I look at the ways that much philosophy gets done, I see certain recurring patterns of thought. The best philosophers repeatedly deploy a wealth of philosophical techniques. I see them used in papers, books, talks, Q & A sessions, and philosophical discussion more broadly. Since I was a graduate student I have observed them, and when they have seemed especially fecund to me, I have recorded them on an ongoing list and I have tried to internalize them. After all, they are part of the philosopher’s intellectual armoury, much as logic is. We may call them philosophical heuristics. But unlike logic, they are not studied or taught. We just use them, but we typically do not do so self-consciously; indeed, we may often use them unconsciously, unaware that we are even doing so. Despite the importance of such heuristics to philosophical methodology, they have been surprisingly neglected by philosophers.