Teachers of literature often have students read works of fiction to learn important truths about the world. But, it is not clear how looking at a work of fiction can tell us about the actual world. This article examines whether and how this can be done.
AllenRT (1986) The reality of responses to fiction. British Journal of Aesthetics261: 64–68.
2.
BlockNStalnakerR (1999) Conceptual analysis, dualism, and the explanatory gap. Philosophical Review108: 1–46.
3.
CarrollN (2002) The wheel of virtue: Art, literature, and moral knowledge. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism60(1): 3–26.
4.
ChalmersD (2002) Does conceivability entail possibility? In: GendlerTHawthorneJ (eds) Conceivability and Possibility, pp. 145–200. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
5.
CurrieG (1990) The Nature of Fiction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
6.
DeresiewiczW (2011) A Jane Austen Education: How Six Novels Taught Me about Love, Friendship, and the Things That Really Matter. New York: Penguin Books.
7.
EdmondsonM (2005) Why Read?New York: Bloomsbury.
8.
FriendS (2014) Believing in stories. In: CurrieGKieranMMeskinAet al. (eds) Aesthetics and the Sciences of Mind, pp. 227–248. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
9.
FriesdorfRConwayPGawronskiB (2015) Gender differences in responses to moral dilemmas: A process dissociation analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin41(5): 696–713.
10.
GautB (2007) Art, Emotion and Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
11.
GibsonJ (2012) Fiction and the Weave of Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
12.
HillCSMcLaughlinBP (1999) There are fewer things in reality than are dreamt of in Chalmers’s philosophy. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research59: 446–454.
13.
KeenS (2007) Empathy and the Novel. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
14.
KitcherP (2011) Science in a Democratic Society. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.
15.
KnobeJSamuelsR (2013) Thinking like a scientist: Innateness as a case study. Cognition126(1): 72–86.
16.
NussbaumM (1992) Love’s Knowledge: Essays on Philosophy and Literature. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
17.
O’NeilO (1986) The power of example. Philosophy61(235): 5–29.
18.
PlumerG (2017) The transcendental argument of the novel. Journal of the American Philosophical Association3(2): 148–167.
19.
QuineWVO (1951) Two dogmas of empiricism. Philosophical Review60: 20–43.
20.
RadfordC (1975) How can we be moved by the fate of Anna Karenina?Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society49: 67–80.
SchnallSHaidtJCloreGet al. (2008) Disgust as embodied moral judgment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin34(8): 1069–1109.
23.
Sinnott-ArmstrongW (2008) Framing moral intuitions. In: Sinnott-ArmstrongW (ed.) Moral Psychology (The Cognitive Science of Morality Intuition and Diversity), Vol. 2, pp. 47–76. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
24.
ThompsonJ (1976) Killing, letting die, and the trolley problem. The Monist59: 204–217.
25.
VaesenKPetersonMVan BezooijenB (2013) The reliability of armchair intuitions. Metaphilosophy44(5): 559–578.
26.
WaltonK (1990) Mimesis as Make-Believe. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
27.
WeinbergJAlexanderJGonnermanCet al. (2012) Restrictionism and reflection. The Monist95: 200–222.
28.
YabloS (1993) Is conceivability a guide to possibility?Philosophy and Phenomenological Research53: 1–42.
