Ken Binmore in Crooked Thinking or Straight Thought? argues that "straight thought" in the tradition of Epicurus and his naturalistic, empirical followers is the proper cure for the "crooked thinking" of philosophers. In response, Gaus argues that the dichotomy between "crooked" and "straight" thinking in philosophy is a false one that ignores what he calls the "paradox of philosophy:" that philosophers are committed to the authority of reason, while also recognizing that reason rarely speaks with one voice on important issues. Instead, Gaus argues that we should think of philosophical doctrines as fables that are constructed to scratch philosophical itches that arise from the use of reason. Insofar as Binmore develops one more such fable, Gaus argues that it doesn't quite scratch the itches that previous thinkers like Gauthier have found troubling.
Gaus, G., Thrasher, J. Philosophic Fables. Homo Oecon (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41412-022-00120-z
This article was originally published in Homo Oeconomicus in 2022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41412-022-00120-z