INTRO TO PHILOSOPHY
INTRO TO PHILOSOPHY PHIL 1000
Popular in Course
Popular in PHIL-Philosophy
This 24 page Class Notes was uploaded by Gianni Kunde on Tuesday October 13, 2015. The Class Notes belongs to PHIL 1000 at Louisiana State University taught by I. Crystal in Fall. Since its upload, it has received 14 views. For similar materials see /class/223067/phil-1000-louisiana-state-university in PHIL-Philosophy at Louisiana State University.
Reviews for INTRO TO PHILOSOPHY
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: 10/13/15
Phil 1000 9282009 90700 PM The structure of the soul self p147 o City has 3 classes soul has 3 parts 0 1 Intellect Virtue will be wisdom o 2 HighSpirited Virtue will be courage o 3 Appetites Virtue will be moderation c Q If soul has 3 parts where is unity of soul If you desire opposites at the same time you must have at least 2 parts of your soul Intellect amp Appetite are constantly at war Appetite 0 Will willingly accept what the intellect tells it to do if they are cognitive allowing for a harmonious soul When part of you is saying yes and the other part is saying no appetite is only concerned with one action not both at the same time This other concern is intellect The nature of your appetite is in part determined by your upbringing from childhood on n Informs the nature of desires you have n Intellect decides whether it s prudent to pursue certain desires or not Intellect 0 Part that is capable of rational calculation HighSpirited 0 Part that becomes angry when your desires appetite overcome rationality intellect HighSpirited is the seed of anger Aligned more with intellect in support of it as long as upbringing was not bad Almost like the auxiliaries of the city When each part is fulfilling its proper function Justice will emerge from the soul just as it does in the city Intellect if properly adhered to forms rational calculations for the well being of the entire soul Decline of any part of soul will be reflected in all parts Because the appetite is cognitive it is able to listen to the rationalities of intellect The just self is the better life because it is being true to the self Regardless of external consequences just life is better than unjust life because you are not betraying your self Ajust self is a unified self an unjust self is a self in a state of civil war If appetite takes over you become a glutton It is because we don t act on everything we have a desire for that we have a state of unified self Books VI amp VII 2 Realms Being Appearance Self and its relation to external reality Sensible world or intelligible world lt H H The good is the highest principle that governs everything for Plato 0 He can t set off what the good itself is only an image of it It goes beyond language Sun Analogy o All the beautiful things in this world are beautiful in light of participating in those forms Things that participate in these forms are in a state of becoming o Eg there is one form of human being and we all participate in that form and upon dying we cease to take part in that form The form itself will never die but those that take part in it will 0 Analogue The sun illuminates and allows the visible object to act upon the seer subject The sun is not a visible object The good is not an intelligible object in the same way that ideas act upon the thinker 2 Worldse world of ideas and this world This world is an image of the other P1609Educational journey soul itself goes on Sun represents good Most people remain in cave whole life thinking this is the real world only an image of the real world Those who leave the cave and see both worlds recognize that the values of those in the cave is not true They see the image the cave represents for what it really is When a person returns to the cave he has to readjust to the darkness The philosophers guide people up and out of the cave Upon returning the seem out of place and useless to matters of the cave because of their philosophical insight If philosophers had their way they would remain in intelligible world but they must return to cave to maintain image the cave reflects It is a necessary part of the human condition Soul has to reacclimatize In order to learn the soul must turn around Some souls never leave the cave and remain taking everything present in cave to be real City is set up for well being of every class it is the duty of the rulers to go back down into the cave because it is for the good of the city as a whole Only the rulers know this Aristotle Categories p181 The species man secondary substance Man himselfePrimary substance Subjectprimary substance Human being is being said of you Primary substance is always the subject Human being is being predicated of you you are not predicated of human being 0 You are a maneattributing a name but also what it means to be a man what that label carries with it Definition Primary substance is that which things are attributed of never predicate always subject of various predicates For human beings to exist there must be primary substances Both the genus and the species are said of you not vice versa There are no degrees of substance I am no more human being than someone else The color of one s skin is an accidental property it does not in any way constitute any human being The essential vs the accidental properties 0 Color of skin height weight are all accidental properties which in no way make up your essence 0 Every species has certain essential properties that come from the genus Rationality Every human being is rational List many other categories which are all contingent upon primary substances the only subjects 0 Quantity quality Philosophy of Naturep201 Philosophy of the sensible world Has a certain sensible structure 0 Natural and Artificial Substances Humans are natural manmade things are artificial Causality for Aristotle is different from today Some things are natural but others are due to other causes others being artificial Hallmark of natural substancee naturally undergo growth movement decay 0 Artificial substances only decay because they happen to be made of natural substances 4 Causes apply to all substances natural and artificial A bed does not relate to wood as being one if its central properties could easily be made of another substance Would is coincidental not essential The principle of building a house is within the house builder artificial within natural Nature consists of natural and artificial substances Artificial substances are the product of various crafts Principal of craft resides with craftsmen If it was other way around houses would build themselves 4 Causes Aitiai o 1 The Material Cause Stuff out of which either substance is made Artificial or Natural Humaneflesh and blood 0 2 The Formal Cause Human being rational o 3 The Efficient Cause parents are the efficient cause of humans house builder efficient cause of house source of change 0 4 The Final Cause the realization of its essence Actually living in the house the final cause is the realization of the formal cause Final cause of humane living rationally o Every substance and its activities are the source of its causes Final Kant Descartes Aristotle on the soul Locke Hobbes On the Soul Plat09 Soul and Body distinct substances dualist Aristotle Soul and Body while distinct from one another are linked together hylomorphist Soul essentially is the form of the body Book II p215 Human beings are compounds exist of both form and matter Although we can distinguish from those two in thought in actuality they are inseparable from each other You will never find organic bodies that are soulless and you will never find a soul wo a body Soul is the form of a certain sort of body Human souls only exist in a human body Soul is the first actuality form of a certain sort of body Soul is what enables that body to have the various capacities it has capacity to eat exercise Definition Soul is the first actuality of a natural body that is potentially alive 0 Souls are not limited to human beings Animals Plants Anything that is alive has a soul Capacity to seee physical organ is eyeballs to hear is ears 0 If an eye was a living creature its ability to see would be the soul its flesh and blood would be the matter A corpse is a human being in name alone homonymously Soul is not the level of second actuality It is simply that in virtue that you have those capacities Intellect is only faculty that does not require a physical organ 3 types of soul Ranked in order 0 1 Human Soul Has all capacities that both others have with additional capacities Only human beings have capacity for rational discourse God is only selfthinking thought Sense perception and motion 0 2 Animal Soul O O Has capacity to take in nutrition reproduce and sense perception Different animals have different perceptions Le a dog s hearing 3 Vegitive Soul Only has capacity to take in nutrition and reproduce In all instances soul is only first actuality of a body that is potentially alive Ch 5 p 220 O O O O O Perception alteration occurs in us the seer Your capacity of sight when you see is going from potentially seeing to actually seeing When your sleeping you are not hearing or seeing You still have them they are at a level of first actuality Right now they are at a level of second actuality because they are being used You wouldn t see anything if there wasn t a physical object acting upon your sight First potentiality fetus has a chance to become human being but it is not yet a human being because it does not have human capacities Two objects of perception that is potential and that is actual In some way the patient becomes likened to the object In some way when you see the whiteboard your faculty of sight becomes likened to the whiteboard First potentiality that you are born as a rational agent with the capacity to know things First Actualitye you know things but you are not acting on your knowledge Second Actualitye Acting on you knowledge Psychological vs Natural Change Ideas are immaterial objects not bodilyphysical Perception is of externalphysical things Ch 12 p 222 Book II 0 Perceiving is like pressing a ring to wax The wax takes the form of the ring but is not the ring in matter Perceiving is taking on the sensible form without the matter If you see a brown horse your faculty of sight becomes brown but you do not become a horse You take on the relevant sensible properties Matter is an irrelevant property Distinguishing bt organ and capacity Capacity is not reducible from the physical thing it is distinct from the physical thing Although soul is dependent upon the body it is not producible to the body Capacity to see is not reducible to your eyeballs even though they depend on them When something smells the air itself becomes odorouse is the air smelling the odor NO The air itself cannot perceive Perceiving involves more than mere affection it s the affection plus the awareness that accompanies it You think ideas ideas don t think you n n p 224 Intellect O O O O O has set of proper objects Intelligibles Capacity to comprehend intelligible form 1St Potentiality Only psychological power that does not have a physical organ Brain is not physical organ of intellect Unlike perceptions that are hindered by too strong of perceptions looking at the sun the intellect is unaffected by such things When the intellect understands something that is strongly intelligible it understands more and is not damaged like the perception Once the intellect is at the level of 1St Actuality it does not need to be taught anything of the subject it already knows the idea of flesh is separable from flesh entities Consequences of intellect not having a physical organ the intellect when it thinks its objects it becomes it objects In that sense it too itself is intelligible u just because it thinks them it is not reduced to them If it was reduced it would lose the ability to think Ideas don t think they are thought 0 Tabula Rasa at the level of 1St potentiality the intellect is like a blank tablet that has nothing written on it 1St Actuality is when it has things written on it 2nd Actuality is when it is thinking 0 2 kinds of intellect Passive Intellect Material Potential n perishable a Potential to be affected by intelligible objects and in that sense become them a the intellect when it thinks its objects it becomes it objects In that sense it too itself is intelligible o just because it thinks them it is not reduced to them If it was reduced it would lose the ability to think Ideas don t think they are thought Active Intellect a Only intellect that survives death a The active intellect s essence is actuality n We do not always have the active intellect because we are not always in a state of understanding sleep o Appears that active intellect is not in us but is God given god has created a lightlike state we are able to understand intelligible objects a Is it part of us o If it is then a part of us survives death if not than we die completely 1St and 2nd actuality applies to intelligible objects as well Descartes Father of modern philosophyamp Rationalist tradition No longer soul and its relation to body but mindbody problem We can understand the self by looking at the self with complete isolation from everything else 2 schools of thought o Rationalists o Descartes Spinoza Leibniz o Empiricists o Hobbes Locke Hume o Kant by himself 0 Thinks both sides got it wrong attempts to marry two groups o Nietzche o Thinks all problems began with Socrates and went down hill from there Meditations Meditation One p490 o tries to clear aristotlean thought away and lay new foundation that is necessary if we are going to engage in the sciences Original foundation must be broken down 0 ancient and medieval science is being rejected o turning inwards into himself 0 employs what is known as Radical Skepticism begins with D denying the existence of the world Epistemology takes precedence 0 going to be looking for the one thing that he cannot doubt the one point on which he is absolutely certain Once he finds that point of contact that will be the new beginningfoundation Anything that can in any way be doubted will be dumped The entire external world is dumped Corporeal world and the sciences that depend on them are gone Physics Astronomy Introduced thought experiment where God is a deceiver o 2 types of substance for D in the Universe Res extensa body occupies space Res cogitansemind o D recognizes that he is finite god is infinite Finite because he is doubting shows that he is limited if he was allknowing he would be infinite 0 Things that would normally be certain are not any more Nothing is certain 22 does not equal 4 according to D it could be 5 He only thinks 22 is 4 because God has told him o By the end of meditation one all that the universe consists of is D s mind and a deceiving God Meditation Two o Looking for one point of certainty in the epistemological realm as opposed to entological 0 Looking within his own mind o The only thing that cannot be called into question is the activity in D s mind D cannot doubt that he is thinking 0 New Foundation He is thinking If he is thinking it necessarily follows that he exists I think therefore I am Only mind he can be certain of is his own o By the end of meditation the only thing that exists in the universe is his mind o I is at the center of the modern self 0 always in a state of selfconciousness 0 self is thinking x and also has this awareness that it IS thinking x o thinking self has contained within it a self awareness c There is no instance of thinking that is not accompanied by self consciousness Meditation Three D is alone in the universe all that he can be certain of is his mind o If an item is clear and distinct it is true o Only place to look for ideas is his own mind 0 Work outwards from it to demonstrate that God exists and is of a certain nature God serves as D s bridge back to the external world Given god s nature it will turn out that our clear and distinct ideas with respect to the sciences will be true wo god would be forced into solipsisme position to avoid at all costs because sciences would lack certainty Solipsism the reality you construct could easily be an illusion o Puts forth causal stricture that demonstrates that God must necessarily exist 0 The role of God is important for D given his radical beginning He needs something in place in addition to his own mind If he doesn t prove gods existence he is toast of philosophical world 0 There must be as much reality in the cause as there is in the effect The effect in question is the idea of God that D finds in his mind while he is exploring the landscaping of his mind there is this infinite allpowerful entity important in such that given D is a finite entity he could not have come up with the idea of his own existence without some influence Deception is incompatible with deception according to D c There is only one possible source for the idea of god God himself 0 Only one perfect entity in the universe God 0 Given god s nature attempt to show all of our clear and distinct ideas must be true 0 D cannot be the source for the idea of God all you do is negate all that is around you hey whats the opposite of a finite substance D believes we have several innate ideas God being one of them God is the 2nd clear and distinct idea he encounters All other ideas can be constructed by D himself Only God can be the source of God effect in question is the idea of a perfect infinite substance in D s mind and the only candidate is God o Blocking off counterargument that he could be the source by simply negating it Although he comes across God as the second thing logically speaking God is the first thing and D is the second because he recognizes he is finite by his doubting Because God is perfect he cannot be a deceiver o If god is not a deceiver then the clear and distinct ideas D has will namely be true Science is completely contingent upon having god in place given the way D began o On the other hand Since god is infinite god could be deceiving us for a greater purpose This brings down the Cartesian principles of clear and distinct ideas If God is a deceiver Descartes is through Given his nature perfect entity he cannot be a deceiver deception and perfection are not compatible argument against it says that D is in no place to make that claim or to know problematic By the end of meditation three D is no longer alone in the universe now his mind exists and this perfect nondeceiving entity exists there is only one possible source for the idea of God and that source is God If the source of the idea comes from god then god must exist cause has to be greater than or equal to the effect Because God is not a deceiver D s clear and distinct ideas will necessarily be true Meditation Four Going to attempt and explain where the source and error and falsity are from How does Error Arise o Distinguish the understanding from another faculty namely the will the will and the understanding work together in unison but differ in scopee sometimes understanding will go beyond and as a consequence error will arise Neither faculty itself is the source of error rather error arises when both faculties are working in unison together Humans can will anything but that doesn t mean it will happen a Will is greater in scope than understanding error arises when they work in unison which results in a false judgment about the world Ideas that are not clear and distinct are ideas that CAN be wrong The will gets the understanding to go further than it can grasp There is nothing imperfect about the faculties rather the way we employ them brings about error 0 God gave us the abilityfaculties such that we don t have to error however given how we sometimes use these faculties such as the will to pass judgment beyond our understanding is then our fault o If we were to remain in the confines of what the intellect has a clear and distinct ideas of then we wouldn t make mistakes Understanding is finite but the will is unlimited infinite God is in no way responsible for error it is entirely our doing Account of Error which only arises when two faculties are working with each other not when they are by themselves Meditation Five o Encounter D s second proof for the existence of God o Ontological argument in an attempt to prove God s existence 0 God must exist because if he didn t then there would be something greater than thought o God s essence and God s existence are inseparable from each other and god is the only creature in the universe this is true for o Sciences are contingent upon the existence of God o Certain ideas are innate god being one of them 0 Also figure and number o For D deception and perception are incompatible o Problematic because we are finite and cannot fully understand god s infinite nature he could be deceiving us because he is infinitely smarter O O O O O O In that case all sciences would be thrown out because god is a deceiver You cannot separate a valley from a mountain in the same way you cant separate God from his essence and existence 0 You cant properly understand Gods essence if you exclude his existence Ontological argument Existence belongs to the ontological domain What follows in the epistemic domain doesn t necessarily follow in the ontological If there is no God the only thing D can be certain of is that he is a thinking thing 0 D needs something in place outside of his mind that will guarantee his clear and distinct ideas are true D is well aware of his critics point 0 Says in case of God one has to make an exception God is that foundation for the truth of our clear and distinct judgments with respect to the sciences We are now in a position to address the position of res extensa Sciences have been reestablished Meditation Six Going to establish the existence of res extensa and show the relationship between his mind and body Two sides 0 Rationlists Descartes Spinoza Lebniz Scientific ideas are found in the mind mind moving outwards o Empiricists Hobbes Locke Hume Our ideas are derived from the external world Proof for res extensa hinges on God not being a deceiver Mind is immaterial body is extended it occupies space Ideas either come from God directly angels or bodies themselves 0 If the latter is true than bodies must exist 0 Since god is NOT a deceiver that eliminates god and angels Point of contact between mind and body 0 Pineal gland place where they meet up as a consequence the mind is able to tell the body what to do 0 Mind is indivisible body is divisible o Conscious states are qualitatively distinct from your dreamlike states 0 Dreamlike states are much simpler not nearly as organized as conscious states Conscious states afford and form much more complexity than dreamlike 0 As a consequence we can distinguish between being awake and being asleep Empiricists Hobbes Leviathan Like Descartes rejects the ancient medieval take on things Although an empiricist embraces certain aspects of D Written during the age of religious wars in Europe We are physical machines state itself is an image of that machine a giant human being 0 Universe is a group bodies that are in motion and the only way those bodies will change direction is through contact with other bodies 0 Machines heart is a spring Material entities No longer talking about soul Empirical approach 0 Our contact with the world is through sense perception Source of ideas 0 There are no ideas in our mind that do not originate wholly or in part from the external world source of all of our ideas We might rearrange those ideas to come up with say the idea of a centaur but you are connecting two things that you have previously had ideas about or experiencedhumans and horses o Danger of empiricism o If there are ideas that cannot be explained with our interaction with the outside world than they are fucked Causality Hume9we impose certain causal orders to certain things Strictly speaking this cannot be derived from the outside world If there are ideas that cannot be described by sense perception there is a huge problem o Setting out what properties are in bodies and what properties are not 0 Colors are not in bodies as we perceive them 0 Rejecting Aristotle s na39ive realism o Rejecting Aristotle s take on things 0 To this point Aristotle s approach on things was the traditional beliefs taught at Universities at the time Locke o Our ideas come about through experience o Put forth several arguments attempting to show that innatism is false 0 Clearly has Descartes in mind in rejecting the Cartesian model 0 Uses Descartes against himself o First criticism of innatisme its uneconomical o If these ideas were innate than God is a pretty shit designer 0 Why would god give us innate ideas and give us the faculties to acquire these ideas REDUNDANT God has given us faculties that are sufficient to account for our ideas we do not need them imprinted upon our soul 0 Innnatism does not sit well with God being perfect given how god has designed us o Second criticisme Universal Assent o If there universal assent to a certain idea innatism is unneeded because everyone can come to agree on a certain point without having it planted in them from birth 0 Universal assent is not sufficient to prove that an idea is innate o Puts forth claim Rejection of innatism 0 Best candidate for an innate idea is the law of contradiction Does not mean it is Most basic principle If an idea were innate it would be universally assented to But this idea is not universally assented because children and dumbasses do not understand it You cannot have an innate idea and be unaware of it given the Cartesian principle Children and idiots are not aware of this idea therefore it is not innate If there are ideas in the mind the mind is aware of it n The mind is transparent to itself you are aware of your ideas The mere capacity to acquire ideas is not mean it is an innate idea o Sensation is our point of contact with the external world 0 Through sensation we acquire all of the ideas we have about the external world 0 Mind focusing upon itself and its own operations The mind performs certain operations it is aware it is performing these operations 0 Sensation and reflection are the only two ways we can gain our experience and acquire ideas If there are any ideas that cannot be accounted for through sensation and reflection then Locke s empirical model is fucked For Locke the mind is like a blank piece of paper and the world writes on it Your ideas are all derived from experience experience is constituted of sensation and reflection Sensation gives ideas about the world reflection gives us ideas about our mind 0 Sensations lead to perceptions Ideas9thin interpretation Perceptions are cognitive Sensation is noncognitive This is why animals can have sensations Sensations point of contact with external world are immediately converted into perceptionse thin interpretations Reflection gives us an idea of our inner sense Sensation and reflection account for all of our mental content 0 O O O O O Missed a day ThinThick interpretations o Substance represents the subject of a thing which hold together all of its properties 0 Idea of substance problematic for Locke Kant Setting out what he takes to be the limits of what we can and cannot know A priorie independent of experience A posteriorie derived from experience Kant attempts to set out the a priori elements of the mind o A priori elements serve as necessary without which experience is not possible Experience presupposes cert a priori elements Time and space are not mind independent o Human modes of apprehension o Kante we cannot access the soul in itself god in itself or the world in itself 0 Once it has been temporalized it has been humanized o 3 biggest questions philosophy cannot answer What is the world in itself What is god in itself What is the soul in itself o Elements of the mind are not capable of generating content content comes from external world Kante Transcendental Idealist o What we have access to from human perception and what we don t 0 Don t have access to the soul world and god in themselves 0 As soon as something presents itself to time and space it has been humanized and is an element of the human mind 3 Elements of our mind o Reason 0 God in itself world in itself soul in itself 0 Cannot be understood but explored by reason anyway because we desire to know o Understanding o A priori elements 12 Categories Unity of apperception I think a seed of our selfconsciousness o Intuition o 2 a priori elements Time amp Space o 15 a priori elements necessary for experience 12 categories Unity of apperception time amp space 0 also need external world to make it come about c We are prisoners of the human perspective 0 We could never apprehend the world as god does could not speak of it one way or another Only speak of what we have access too Productive imagination o Connects 2 faculties of understanding and intuition together Hume s influence on Kant o Experience has give you one event coming from another event 0 Stripping down and narrowing what Locke said 0 Opening the door for the mind to import things that didn t come from the external world o Causality is not something we derive from the world rather its something we come up with through human custom o Hume s skepticism grows out of Locke s problematic account Back to Kant o On one hand you have raw materialdata of the external world on the other there are mental operations which instantaneously kick in 0 These two things working in tandem organize this data which leads to experiences of the world 0 You need both 0 The mind has certain writing on it from the get go namely the certain a priori elements Elements written on the mind when the mind encounters the world for the first time o Were looking for all of the principles of the mind 0 What is it that the mind brings to the table independent of experience 0 Not in an empirical manner to do so we be to presuppose them Transcendental Doctrine of Elements p928 Two forms of intuition are our point of contact with the world 1St Faculty is sensibility which is receptive passive9time amp space 0 Only receives data in a temporal and spacial manner 0 Space is not mind independent Meaning it is not an element of the mind 0 Sensation is merely the matter that is instantaneously specialized and temporilized into experience 0 Space and time do not generate objects Space out sense Time inner sense 0 Space is an element of the mind human perspective Constitutes one of the necessary conditions for experience 0 Space itself is presupposed Rejecting the utopian notion of space 0 We are incapable of imagining a spaceless universe 0 Space and time are formal because they are a priori The notion of space itself is not capable of generating objects to occupy it Things in themselves vs appearances 0 Only aware of the latter we have no access to things in themselves 0 Don t know what lies behind the appearances only what appears to us Space is universally applicable to every instance of our human outer sensibility Space and time are the only two elements of this faculty 2nd Faculty of Experiencee Understanding Active covers the 12 categories Unity of apperception we apprehend things in time that s just how we operate hallmark of time is secession hallmark of space is simultaneously outer world presents itself to us in time comes under the formal condition of time o intuitions are the way the world presents itself to you c a priori synthetic judgments o 2 kinds ofjudgment 1 Analytic n all bachelors are unmarried menepredicate is contained in subject a Kant did not believe in this kind ofjudgment 2 Synthetic a predicate is not contained in subject a Kant believes in this o Conditions are mind dependent Unity of apperception o Rules for ordering content content must be ordered from external world o Extends all the way down to the faculty of sensibility Setting out all of the necessary conditions for experience o Experience presupposes causality a priori o Judging presupposes the self unity of apperception o No judging no self 0 Self is not excluded from the faculty of sensibility o Thee world is presenting itself to you as a consequence the presentations are yours 9282009 90700 PM 9282009 90700 PM
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'