Hesam Mohamadi


I'm Hesam Mohamadi. I was born in Tabriz, Iran, in 1992. I received my B.S. from the University of Tehran in Electrical Engineering and my M.A. from Tarbiat Modares University in Philosophy. 

I wrote my dissertation under the supervision of Prof. Davood Hosseini on "Functionality of Vagueness in Law", which partly satisfied my interest in philosophy of law and philosophy of language. Now, my focus is shifting towards applied ethics and epistemology.

I was trying to find a way to briefly represent my philosophical positions for long. in 2017, I realized that a conducted research has provided what I needed. David Bourget and David J. Chalmers carried out a research to find in what issues philosophers have a consensus on and in what issues they diverge most. To do that, they prepared a series of questions concerning the most important issues in philosophy and delivered the questions to philosophers all around the world (The results were published in "What do philosophers Believe?", 2013). 
The list of questions have been regarded as a standard measure for characterization of philosophers from then. It has been proposed that the answers to those questions can be seen as a simple introduction to the one's thoughts. 
In the original experiment, people were just supposed to choose an option without any explanation and I did the same. I tried to rely on rational aspect of my personality and refuse to answer the questions that I don't have a compelling reason in favor of one of the sides. I guess the answers I provided represent what kind of philosopher I am. 

(Updated in March 2019)

  1. A priori knowledge: yes or no?


2. Abstract objects: platonism or nominalism?


3. Aesthetic value: objective or subjective?


4. Analytic-synthetic distinction: yes or no?


5. Epistemic justification: internalism or externalism?


6. External world: idealism, skepticism, or non-skeptical realism?

Idealism and Non-skeptical Realism. I favor Kant's view regarding the external world.

7. Free will: compatibilism, libertarianism, or no free will?

No free will 

8. God: theism or atheism?


9. Knowledge: empiricism or rationalism?

None. I guess Kant would say the same.

10. Knowledge claims: contextualism, relativism, or invariantism?


11. Laws of nature: Humean or non-Humean?


12. Logic: classical or non-classical?

Whatever works!

13. Mental content: internalism or externalism?


14. Meta-ethics: moral realism or moral anti-realism?

Moral anti-realism

15. Metaphilosophy: naturalism or non-naturalism?


16. Mind: physicalism or non-physicalism?


17. Moral judgment: cognitivism or non-cognitivism?


18. Moral motivation: internalism or externalism?


19. Newcomb’s problem: one box or two boxes?

Insufficiently familiar with the subject

20. Normative ethics: deontology, consequentialism, or virtue ethics?

They are the same!

21. Perceptual experience: disjunctivism, qualia theory, representationalism, or sense-datum theory?


22. Personal identity: biological view, psychological view, or further-fact view?


23. Politics: communitarianism, egalitarianism, or libertarianism?

Insufficiently familiar with the subject.

24. Proper names: Fregean or Millian?

Leaning towards Millian

25. Science: scientific realism or scientific anti-realism?


26. Teletransporter (new matter): survival or death?


27. Time: A-theory or B-theory?


28. Trolley problem (five straight ahead, one on side track, turn requires switching, what ought one do?): switch or don’t switch?


29. Truth: correspondence, deflationary, or epistemic?


30. Zombies: inconceivable, conceivable but not metaphysically possible, or metaphysically possible?

Inconceivable. P-zombies are metaphysically impossible.