An Examination of Avicenna’s View on the Impact of Philosophical Expertise on Quality of Intuitive Replies (A Comparative Study with regard to Some of Experimental Philosophers’ Standpoints)

Intuition is a philosophical judgment tool. Some accept it as a method in philosophy and others deny it. On the deniers' side, some philosophers, based on the diversity of responses to intuition pumps, consider it as an uncertain or invalid method. By contrast, the others claim that the incidental factors because distorted responses and there is not any wrong in intuitive method by itself. Here the level of expertise considered as one of the external factors that causes the accuracy or inaccuracy of intuitions. An accurate intuitive response can be found by questioning experts, not lay people. Avicenna’s view is compatible with the expertise-based view. In his rejoinder to a critic, he mentioned the intuitive arguments are not proper for all, but for those who possess perspicuity and subtle intelligence and his reply implies that he trusted the responses of meticulous philosophers more than others. This comparative work suggests a novel reading of Avicenna’s reply to his critic and reconsiders the interpretation that charges him with engaging in an ad hominem argument.