My informal theory of metaphilosophy is something like: an answer to a philosophical question is good when it seems intuitive, logically consistent and parsimonious
“Intuitive” is a large part of the problem: intuitions vary, which is one reason why philosophers tend not to converge.
Second, obviously in order to solve philosophical problems (such as the theory of agents), we need to implement a particular metaphilosophy.
Metaphilosophy doesn’t necessarily give you a solution: it might just explain the origins of the problem.
“Intuitive” is a large part of the problem: intuitions vary, which is one reason why philosophers tend not to converge.
Metaphilosophy doesn’t necessarily give you a solution: it might just explain the origins of the problem.