Viewed against these challenges, our semi-automated approach may be thought to possess significant empirical advantages over this traditional method. Granted, our reliance on expert conceptualizations for the InPhO’s basic framework renders us vulnerable to some of these worries—but we do not ask experts to represent any- thing outside of their own area of specialization. Furthermore, our feedback system is deployed with redundancy in mind. We propose the same hypotheses to multiple experts in the feedback process, and the nonmonotonicity of our logic programming methods allows us to flexibly respond to expert disagreement. OUR hope is that this will afford the InPhO a degree of intersubjectivity. [...] We record not just what philosophers think they are writing about, but also study statistical properties of their actual output .