Is Philosophy Exceptional? A Corpus-Based, Quantitative Study

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


Drawing on the epistemology of logic literature on anti-exceptionalism about logic, we set out to investigate the following metaphilosophical questions empirically: Is philosophy special? Are its methods (dis)continuous with science? More specifically, we test the following metaphilosophical hypotheses empirically: philosophical deductivism, philosophical inductivism, and philosophical abductivism. Using indicator words to classify arguments by type (namely, deductive, inductive, and abductive arguments), we searched through a large corpus of philosophical texts mined from the JSTOR database (N = 435,703) to find patterns of argumentation. The results of our quantitative, corpus-based study suggest that deductive arguments are significantly more common than abductive arguments and inductive arguments in philosophical texts overall, but they are gradually and steadily giving way to non-deductive (i.e. inductive and abductive) arguments in academic philosophy.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)666-683
Number of pages18
JournalSocial Epistemology
Issue number5
Early online dateAug 25 2022
StatePublished - 2023


  • exceptionalism
  • indicator words
  • philosophical abductivism
  • philosophical deductivism
  • philosophical inductivism

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Philosophy
  • Social Sciences(all)


Dive into the research topics of 'Is Philosophy Exceptional? A Corpus-Based, Quantitative Study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this