Philosophy notes 1-3
Popular in Introduction to Philosophy
Popular in Department
This 12 page Class Notes was uploaded by Alona Tucker on Wednesday January 27, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to PHIL 102 001 at a university taught by Brian Fields in Winter 2016. Since its upload, it has received 25 views.
Reviews for Philosophy notes 1-3
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 01/27/16
Monday, February 1, y Philosophy notes What is Philosophy Philosophers attempt to discover truth through reason, and we do this by making arguments. What are facts? A statement is true if it corresponds with the way the world actually is Subjective vs. Objective Something is said to be objective if pertains to everyone Something is said to be subjective if it only pertains to the individual Most philosophers are concerned with objective truth or big T say my belief is…. but the truth is something different Argument: What is wrong with this argument. “All truth is subjective, therefore there are no objective truth.” 5 Branches of Philosophy • Logic • Epistemology • Metaphysics • Ethics • Aesthetics Logic: The study of arguments Epistemology : The study or they of knowledge “ What does it mean to know something” you have to have justified true belief Metaphysics: The study of the nature of reality 1 Monday, February 1, y Ethics: The study of how we should act. What is right and what is wrong Aesthetics: The study of questions concerning art and beauty “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder” Thought experiments is as an important tool for evaluating philosophical theories you must be able to use your imagination Chapter 2 Argument: Statement or statements used in support of another statement Premises: Reasons offered in support of a conclusion Conclusion: The claim that an argument attempts to establish Deductive argument: Argument where the truth of premises is supposed to guarantee the truth of the conclusion example: All men are mortal Socrates is a man Therefore, Socrates is mortal m Example: IF god didn't not exist then the universe would not exist But the universe does exist Therefor, God Exists Valid argument: A deductive argument where the truth of the premises guarantees the truth of the conclusions Invalid Argument: A “Deductive” argument where the truth of the premises does not guarantee the truth of the conclusion 2 Monday, February 1, y Sound argument: A valid deductive argument with only true premises Never none of the above, don't say invalid with sound ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS WRONG Four common valid forms: P Modus Pones the rule of logic stating that if a conditional statement (“if p then q ”) is accepted, and the antecedent ( p ) holds, then the consequent ( q ) may be inferred. Modus Tollens What does valid mean? If the premises are true then the conclusion must follow. If the premises are true 3 Monday, February 1, y hypothetical syllogism: Inductive Arguments : Argument where the truth of the premises gives some degree of probability that the conclusion is also true. Strong inductive arguments : Inductive argument where the truth go the premises gives us a high probability that the conclusion is also true Cogent argument: A strong inductive argument with only true premises Weak inductive argument: Argument where the truth of the premises gives us low probability that the conclusion is also true 3 MAIN TYPES OF INDUCTIVE arguments 1:Enumerative inductive argument: example: All observed As have been Bs Therefore, probably all A’s Everywhere are B’s example: All the winters in Detroit that i have observed have been cold therefore probably all winters in Detroit have been cold 2.Argument by analogy: A and B are similar in these relevant ways. 4 Monday, February 1, y Some further characteristics are true of A Therefore, this further characteristic is also true of B 3. Inference to the best explanation: Some event occurred the best explanation for the event is X Therefore X is probably is true Ockhams Razor: explanation A is better than Explanation B if (all other things being equal) explanation A makes fewer assumptions than explanation B. The principal of conservatism: Explanation A is better than explanation B if (All other things being equal) explanation A fits together better with the rest of my beliefs about the world Fallacy: A mistake in reasoning Straw man: Misrepresenting an opponents view so is can be easily dismissed. (Scarecrow) Begging the question: An argument where we must already accept the conclusion in order to accept the premises. Domino argument: Arguing without warrant that if we allow some event to occur then other more significant events will follow. Equivocation: An argument that contains ambiguous word or phrase that contains an ambiguous word or phrase whose intended meaning shifts from one occurrence to another. A Worldview: All of your personal beliefs Logical consistency: Two propositions are logically consistent if they can both be true at the same time Contradiction: A proposition that both denies and assets that something is the case 5 Monday, February 1, y Contradictions can not be true Are these consistent or not consistent, can they be true at the same time example, It is always morally wrong to take the life of another human being it is morally permissible to execute serious criminals BOTH CANT BE RIGHT AT THE SAME TIME 2nd example the theory of evolution is true God exist Both can be true, no contradiction 3rd EXAPMLE 1 No animals have a soul 2 humans are animals Logically Possibility : Something is logically piste if it does not contain a logical contradiction Something is logically impossible if it contains a logical contradiction Logically possible claims: 1) Santa clause exists 2) I can fly to the moon if i flap my arms really fast 3) I have 1million in my pocket 4) Mars is made out of cheese Logically impossible claims: can i make a movie out of it 6 Monday, February 1, y 1 it is both raining and not raining outside the door. 5) The youngest person in the room is three years older than me 6) some squares are perfectly round Casually Possibility: Something is causally possible if it does not contain a violation of the laws of physics Something is causally impossible if it contains a violation of the laws of physics Casually possible claims: Whatever can happen in the real world is logically possible 1 There is a giraffe in the next room 7) the tigers will win the world series 8) I have 18 brothers and sisters (Tv, reality shows, so it could be true) 9) I will give you each 1million Causally impossible claims: 1 I can fly to the moon id i flap my arms really fast 10)I can throw a football 2 miles 11)the oldest man alive is 847 years old 12)my uncle can turn water into wine Our ability to know if a proposition is true or false depends greatly on our understanding of the terms used Necessary condition: Some criterion that must be met q is a necessary condition for p if it is impossible for something to be p without being q Necessary conditions: 1 being a man is a necessary condition for being a bachelor 13)being a female is a necessary condition for being a sister 7 Monday, February 1, y 14)having four sides is a necessary condition for being a square Sufficient Condition: Some criterion or criteria that once it is met, is all that is needed ( Is enough, is it all i need) example: If she's a sister than you know she's a sibling thats all we would need to know q is a sufficient condition for P if it is impossible for something to be a q and not a p Sufficient conditions 1 Being a dog is a sufficient condition for being a mammal 15)being a grandfather is a sufficient condition for being a father 16)Living in the U.S is a sufficient condition for living in North america 17)Being enrolled in my course is a sufficient condition for being a wayne state student If Y is true only when X is true, then X is a necessarcondition for Y. Chapter 3 What is knowledge? Justification Truth Belief A priori Knowledge that comes by means of reason alone A posteriori Knowledge that comes by means of our sensory experience Two kinds of truths Necessary: It is true in all possible worlds Contingent: It is not true in all possible worlds, but it is true in our world Two kinds of propositions Analytic Statements that are true by definition 8 Monday, February 1, y Synthetic Statements that are not true by definition, but are true in virtue of the way the world actually is Three main theories of knowledge 1) Skepticism 2) Rationalism 3) Empiricism Skepticism: The view that we can not have knowledge Two kinds of skepticism 1) Local skepticism: The view that knowledge of a certain subject matter is impossible 4) Global skepticism : The view that knowledge of any kind is impossible Rationalism: The view that our beliefs can best be justified through reason alone Empiricism: The view that our beliefs can best be justified through sensory experience 3 Kinds of empiricism Naive Realism: The view that the world is exactly as we perceive it to be Indirect realism : The view that the world is not exactly as we perceive it to be, but is closely related t o our perceptions. idealism : the view that the world is nothing more than our perceptions of it. All that exists are minds and ideas. Advantage of Skepticism: It supports the immenseness view that knowledge requires certainty 9 Monday, February 1, y Advantages of rationalism : 1) We seem to have knowledge of many claims through reasons alone (Mathematics, logical truths, moral claims.) 5) It avoids some of the problems that the other theories of knowledge face Advantages of empiricism 1) Empirical beliefs seem more reliable that other beliefs 6) It is strongly supported by the success of the natural sciences Argument for skepticism if we bow that a proposition is true then it would be impossible to doubt that proposition But we can doubt any proposition Therefore, I can never know that ay proposition is true The main Objection to skepticism 1) Certainty is too strong of a requirement of knowledge Prima Facie ( At first glance): It is evidence that is immediately available Prima facie justification that goes undefeated might be sufficient for knowledge Argument for rationalism: If we know that a proposition is true then justification for our knowledge comes from reason alone We know that analytic propositions are true Therefore, the justification for out knowledge of analytic propositions comes from reasons alone The main Objection to rationalism Rationalist can only show that we know analytic proportions ar tue but analytic propositions are trivial Argument for Empiricism: 10 Monday, February 1, y If we know that a proposition is true then justification for that knowledge must come from sense of experience We know that many synthetic propositions are true THEREFORE, the justification for our know of those synthetic propositions comes from sense of experience The main Objection to Empiricism 1) The problem of induction: Empiricist can not explain how or why enumerative inductive arguments are justified The principal of the uniformity of nature: Nature is consistent. The laws that govern the past will continue to govern the future Descartes: Descartes argues that if we know some proposition, then it is impossible to doubt that proposition 1) My Senses sometimes deceive me. 7) Is it possible that I am dreaming. 8) It is possible that an evil genius is tricking me Descartes is a rationalist . he believes that if we have knowledge, then we have it through reason alone. He argues that the only way in which we can perceive things clearly and distinctly is through reason (Wax Example). What cant you doubt even if your senses are deceiving you, you are dreaming or an evil genius is tricking you. The first thing Descartes argues that we can not doubt is the claim “I am having some experience? “ I exist” “Cogito ergo sum” I think, therefore I am. Descartes’ argument for our knowledge there for internal world: 1) I know I have experiences 9) I know I exist 11 Monday, February 1, y 10) I know that God exists 11) I know God is not a deceiver 12)Therefore, I know the world is as i clearly and distinctly perceive it to be Descartes argument for our knowledge concerning GodL 1) If god does not exist , then I would not have a clear and distinct idea of God. 13)I do have a clear and distinct idea of God 14)Therefore god does not exists The main objection to descartes argument: It is possible to doubt Descartes’ beliefs that God exists and God is not a deceiver since it is possible to doubt these claims then they fail to meet descartes’ requirement for knowledge. 12
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'