...Reason must indeed approach nature in order to be instructed by it; yet it must do so not in the capacity of a pupil who lets the teacher tell him whatever the teacher wants, but in the capacity of an appointed judge who compels the witnesses to answer the question that he puts to them.
In my time here at Notre Dame, I have started to find that my own research is increasingly concerned with how to rationally approach and mediate disagreement that occurs in the moral, religious, and non-moral factual realms--basically everywhere we encounter apparent disagreement. To that end, I have been exploring ways of blending pragmatist teachings by such philosophers as C. S. Peirce and John Dewey, with certain positivist strands, as found in W. V. Quine and even Aristotle, in order to evaluate what is right, and what wrong, with our ordinary presuppositions about knowledge in general. Obviously, I greatly sympathize with the pragmatists and their few brave contemporary revivalists. A further goal of my research is thus to show the important relevance of their insights to making sense of our differences as thinkers in areas as diverse as public policy and morality.
Here you will find some papers of mine, which may
or may not directly involve my abovementioned research
Philosophy of Language & Mind
History of Philosophy
Ethics & Social and Political Philosophy