APA Member Interview, Phil Corkum

"A venerable tradition in metaphysics holds that taking metaphysical inquiry to be objective, and so responsive primarily to facts which obtain independently of human interests, entails that theory choice in metaphysics is both resistant to variation from one context of inquiry to another, and insensitive to nonepistemic values. I've been raised in that tradition. So naturally, I disagree with all of that."

"My response, waiting in readiness all these years-'Me.'-did not impress. You, reader, are of course a close second. I don't know about ratings, either over- or under-. But the impact of a philosopher seems directly proportional to the ease with which their name admits of adjectival form. 'Platonic' rolls off the tongue. 'Lewisian' or 'Rawlsian' ain't bad, either. On a side note: 'Corkumian'? My career faces innate challenges; let's just admit it."

Phil Corkum is Professor of Philosophy at the University of Alberta and previously taught at the University of Colorado, Boulder. His work spans ancient philosophy, the history of logic, and metaphysics, and a Neo-Aristotelian Metaphysics volume is now out with Cambridge University Press. He recounts a witty classroom exchange about a favorite philosopher and observes that philosopher impact often correlates with easily formed adjectival names like 'Platonic' or 'Lewisian.' He rejects the view that metaphysical theory choice is context-insensitive and argues for a context-sensitive, value-laden metaphysics that nonetheless aims to describe the objective structure of the world. Historical scholarship contributes by assessing nonepistemic values such as novelty and conservativeness that influence methodological selection.

Read at Apaonline