Philosophical Intuitions Are Surprisingly Stable Across both Demographic Groups and Situations

In the early days of experimental philosophy, a number of studies seemed to suggest that people's philosophical intuitions were in a certain sense ​unstable​. Such studies typically used one of two broad approaches. First, some studies looked at the impact of demographic factors. In these studies, all participants received the same question, but different participants belonged to different demographic groups. The results appeared to show that people from different demographic groups had radically different patterns of philosophical intuition (e.g., Machery, Mallon, Nichols & Stich, 2004; Weinberg, Nichols & Stich, 2001). Second, some studies manipulated features of the situation. In these studies, all participants received the same question, but researchers manipulated something about the situation participants were in while answering. The results appeared to show that people in different situations had very different patterns of philosophical intuition (e.g., Swain, Alexander, & Weinberg, 2008; Wheatley & Haidt, 2005). These early studies attracted an enormous amount of attention in the philosophical community, and they inspired a sustained effort to explore the philosophical implications of instability. The core question guiding this research has been: “If we learn that people's intuitions are unstable, what should we conclude about the use of intuitions in philosophy?” Attempts to answer this question have shown truly impressive levels of sophistication and ingenuity. In more recent years, however, there has been an explosion of new empirical research about philosophical intuitions. These more recent studies offer a very different picture of people's philosophical intuitions. The evidence now suggests that ​philosophical intuitions are surprisingly​ ​stable​ . Indeed, the available evidence suggests that philosophical intuitions are surprisingly stable across both demographic groups and situations. The entire aim of the present paper is to review evidence for this one claim. Of course, if the claim does turn out to be true, it immediately leaves us with some deeper theoretical questions, but I will not be defending any view about those deeper questions here. The reason is not that such questions lie outside the scope of the paper. It is simply that I have not been able to come up with any good answers.