Pölzler Thomas
Department of Philosophy, University of Graz, Attemsgasse 25/II, 8010 Graz, Austria.
Erkenntnis. 2025;90(4):1293-1322. doi: 10.1007/s10670-023-00747-7. Epub 2023 Nov 14.
In recent years an increasing number of political philosophers have begun to ground their arguments in empirical evidence. I investigate this novel approach by way of example. The object of my case study is David Miller's renewed empirical argument for a needs-based principle of justice. First, I introduce Miller's argument. Then I raise four worries about the application of his methodology that give rise to corresponding general recommendations for how to do empirical political philosophy. Proponents of this approach should take care to (1) check for inappropriately narrow (and broad) samples, (2) verify studies' relevance for their empirical hypotheses, (3) adjust their confidence to the available empirical evidence, and (4) properly integrate their hypotheses into their philosophical theorizing.
近年来,越来越多的政治哲学家开始将他们的论点建立在经验证据的基础之上。我将通过实例来研究这种新颖的方法。我案例研究的对象是大卫·米勒(David Miller)重新提出的基于需求的正义原则的经验论证。首先,我介绍米勒的论证。然后,我对他的方法论应用提出四点担忧,这些担忧引出了关于如何进行经验主义政治哲学研究的相应一般性建议。这种方法的支持者应注意:(1)检查样本是否过窄(或过宽);(2)核实研究与他们的经验假设的相关性;(3)根据现有的经验证据调整他们的信心;(4)将他们的假设恰当地整合到他们的哲学理论中。