Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
The success of Philosophy is you know how to THINK and REASON OUT validly.
ORIGINS OF PHILOSOPHY IN ANCIENT GREECE
-At the beginning, between the 6th and 5th C. B.C., the term philosophy had a rather generic
meaning. It meant the intellectual activity which gave rise to culture as a rhetorical and literary
phenomenon.
-Before philosophy, the ancient Greeks were so engrossed with their myths about their gods and
goddesses to such an extent that in order to please the gods and grant their wishes, they would offer
some token whenever they needed some favor from these gods.
-Before the emergence of philosophy as a discipline, any investigation regarding the nature of things
would be labeled as phusis or nature in the English language. Back then, there was no distinction
between science, philosophy, or religion. Thus, any investigation regarding the nature of things in
general falls under phusis.
-Greek notion of Philosophy
1. It refers to method
-Philosophy is a purely rational explanation of the totality of reality.
-A philosopher does not merely observe reality; he inquires into its causes and principles-into
its first cause and ultimate principles since it is reality taken as a whole that constitutes the object of
this study.
-Aristotle: Wisdom must always deal with the first causes and principles of things
2. It refers to its end
-Philosophy has an exclusively speculative and contemplative end
-Aristotle: Philosophy is, therefore, a free science, inasmuch as it does not pursue any
utilitarian end. It seeks no other goal but that of knowledge for its own sake, and derives its stimulus
from no other source but the natural desire of all men to know. All men, by their very nature, have a
desire to know
THE PRE-SOCRATICS
1. The Milesians
-They were the first ones who tried to give a unifying and coherent explanation of the nature of
reality. They were also considered as the doctrine that all matter has life hylozoist from the
root word hylo or stuff; and zoe or life because they believe that the universe is alive or
animate and material.
a. THALES OF MILETUS
-Father of Western Philosophy
-As early as 630 B.C., He was already doing philosophy.
-He also excelled in politics, mathematics, and astronomy.
-Thales did not commit his thought to writing, and the little we know about him as a
philosopher comes mainly from Aristotle.
-Two basic philosophical ideas of Thales according to Aristotle:
1. Water is the first absolute principle
-The underlying substance that reality is made because it is everywhere. It can change
into solid, liquid, or gas, it is observed as dew in the morning, it was even believed that the
sea was farther of all things. He may have given a very simplistic answer when he claimed
that reality is water. However, the more important point to emphasize here is that a
man has dared to go against tradition for the first time, and assumed that it is within
mans rational ability to abstract and explain reality.
-the first from which all things come to bethe last into which all things are
resolvedeven the Earth floats upon water. Hence, Water is the material cause of all
things. He neglected substantial change in the universe-he thought that there was only
accidental change.
2. The soul is the principal motor
-the soul is a motive force: the magnet has a soul in it because it moves the iron
(Thales basis for saying that the soul is a motive force)
-the soul is intermingled in the whole universe.all things are full of gods.
-What does Thales mean when he says that all things are full of gods? Does this have
anything to do with his notion of the soul as a motor principle? Based on what Thales says
about the magnet, it seems logical to conclude with Aristotle that, for Thales, the soul is the
principle of life and movement. Not only magnetic stones are endowed with souls:
everything else, the whole universe, is impregnated with life. For Thales, this vital force is
divine in nature, and affects even those things which appear inanimate.
b. ANAXIMANDER
-born around the year 611 B.C.
-A disciple of Thales
-wrote a book entitled On Nature
-For Him, it was not water but the peiron-the infinite or the unlimited-which constituted
the first principle.
The peiron
-For Anaximander, it is not only a material principle of infinite extension; it is also a principle
characterized by the absence of any formal determination. It has no positive identity: it is
neither water, nor air, nor any one of the known elements. It can be likened either to the
material cause or to the divinity, depending on which aspects are given prominence.
-All things proceed necessarily from it by means of the separation of contraries, and return
to it in a necessary manner as well.
1. The peiron as a material cause
-It is not one of the elements. It is of an indeterminate nature, and hence, is
different from, and naturally prior to, all the other existing substances.
2. The peiron as a divine principle
-Aristotle: There cannot be a source of the infinitebut it is rather (the infinite)
which is held to be the principle of other things; it is what encompasses all and governs
allMoreover, the infinite is divine because it is immortal and imperishable.
-It encompasses and governs all things as a divine, immortal and indestructible
principle. It must possess these attributes. Because it is unlimited, it is unaffected by the
limiting factors of all earthly realities, such as death and corruption.
c. ANAXIMINES
-Born at the beginning of the 6th C. B.C., and died towards the end of the same century.
d. Heraclitus
-born in the middle of the 6th C. B.C., and died around 480 B.C.
-came from Miletus and belonged to the aristocracy
-the last of the Ionian philosopher who remained in his country
-He was known as Weeping Philosopher and the obscure one
-Plato and Aristotle described his philosophy simply as an exaggerated relativism.
-
Universal Change
-He affirmed that everything in constant flux: panta rei, everything changes.
-Heraclituss philosophy developed out of pessimistic observations regarding change. He
saw the world as existing in a state of perpetual change. Nothing could last, and nothing
could stay the same forever.
-All things change and that nothing is at rest.
-His most quoted words are You cant step in the same river twice (i.e. it will change from
moment to moment) and Everything changes, only becoming remains constant
throughout.
2. The Pythagoreans
-Greek philosopher and mathematician who discovered the Pythagorean Theorem.
-they sought the first principle of all things in a different order, viz., in mathematics.
-Number, the principle of all things
-They concluded that number and its elements constituted the principle of all things:
number constituted the essence and substance of all that was real.
-Even-Odd; Limited-Unlimited
-This means that every number can always be divided into even and odd
elements. It follows from this that even and odd elements constitute the universal elements
of number, and hence, of all things as well. But since the even is identified with the
unlimited and the odd with the limited, everything must be composed of this pair of
contrasts.
-Hence, every reality was composed of an unlimited element and a limited
element.
-Aristotles criticism on the Pythagoreans: In all this, they are not seeking for theories and
causes to account for observed facts, but rather forcing their observation and trying to
accommodate them to certain theories and opinions of their own.
3. The Eleatics
Parmenides
-He was born in Elea (now the modern city of Velia in Italy), possibly in the second half
of the 6th century B.C.
-He espoused a complex doctrine involving ontology-the question of what things must
exist by necessity, what things cannot possibly exist, and in what ways things can exist.
-His thought continues the tradition of his predecessors because his central problem
remains the same-nature and its first principle.
-The Way of Truth
-Two questions have to be answered to understand the mind of Parmenides:
What does he mean by being? Why did he see being as the unifying principle of everything
real?
-Parmenides notion of being is univocal. It does not refer to any concrete
sensible reality but only to being as such, to the being which everything possesses since all of
them exist. This is the being which encompasses everything-the mobile and immobile, the
simple and complex, what is light and what is heavy; everything that exists belongs to being.
-Being is only apprehended by the intellect. The senses grasp the multiplicity of
the sensible; but the intelligence sees beyond the appearances, and knows that behind them
lies only one reality: being.
-For Parmenides, therefore, being and thought are correlative terms since
being only reveals itself to thought, and it is this revelation that constitutes the
truthBeing is unbegotten and incorruptible. On one hand, it cannot come from non-being,
because non-being is nothing, and from nothing nothing comes. On the other hand, it cannot
come from being because being exists, and what already exists need not be brought into
existence. Being, therefore has no beginning and no end. It is immutable, perfect,
complete, with no need for anything.
-Being underlies everything, and constitutes their profound reality. Being is
and always will be what it is. Things can change; they come to be and they die, they grow and
they wane, but being itself always remains one and the same.
-The being of Parmenides cannot be a principle because nothing can
proceed from it.
-The Problem in Parmenides thought
-For the Ionians, the first principle is the origin of all things through the many
changes it undergoes; but for Parmenides, being remains unchanged and always the same.
The problem, therefore, naturally arises: what reality does Parmenides attribute to the sensible
and multiple? What relation does it have with being?
-The Way of Opinion
-If Heraclitus conceives reality as perpetual becoming, Parmenides sees it as
immutable being; if the former defends universal movement as the result of the permanent
opposition of contraries, the latter claims that movement is only an appearance because every
opposition would entail the real duality of being and non-being; if Heraclitus is the philosopher
of becoming, Parmenides is the philosopher of absolute stability.
4. The Pluralists
-This group refuted the Milesians theories and argued that matter was made of many different
substances.
Philosophy-Works-Purifications, On Nature
1. Held that things were ultimately made of four roots-earth, fire, air, and water, which
eternal and intrinsically immutable.
2. He sought to substantiate in this theory the doctrine of Parmenides. Change in the
universe was a running through of the roots (or elements).
3. He found for the first time the sign of an external efficient cause.
Particles of roots were set in motion by Love and Hate (Strife)-Love brings things together, and
therefore, is at the origin of the generation of things. On the other hand, Hate is divisive and
brings about corruption. Love and Hate are two forces that are constantly at odds with each
otherThey acted according to no law, so everything seemed governed by chance and the
survival of the fittest.
Theory of Life
-Everything was pure chance; survival of the fittest
-There was no distinction between sensation and reasoning.
-He held that there was an infinite number of things, but four varieties only. Particles were
immutable, but they moved locally. To explain this, he brought in the first external efficient cause; in
fact, two-love and strife. The universe was purely mechanistic, devoid of all finality.
The Homeomeries
-The multiplicity of substances lead Anaxagoras to conclude that the first principle must, in a
way, embody all things in itself.
-He affirmed that the first principle was a confused mixture of infinitesimally small elements
which are inert, unchangeable, eternal, and qualitatively different from one another. They are the
seeds of all things. Aristotle called them homeomeries, or things which remain qualitatively the
same even if they are divided into smaller and smaller parts.
-Everything is found in everything
-The qualitative differences of all things are found in every being, though some elements may
be minimally represented in the nature.
The Intelligence
-Intelligence is separated to the matter
-Nous (the mind or the intellect; for Informal British, common sense; practical intelligence)
-the Nous functions only as the origin of movement. Since the seeds of all things are eternal,
the Intelligence merely starts the cosmic movement whereby things begin to differentiate themselves
from one another, and take on their particular characteristics.
Knowledge
-For the atomists, knowledge, whether sensible or intellectual, is caused by the contact
of atoms.
Protagoras
-He rejects Parmenides being
-Man determines the truth of the object, and he determines it according to his own knowledges
-Knowledge for Protagoras is based exclusively on the senses which are constantly subject to
change
-Man is the measure of all things-things which exist insofar as they exist, and things which do
not exist insofar as they do not exist
-Wisdom for him not only meant skillful rhetoric but above all the ability to discern what is good
and evil in every circumstance and in each thing.
Gorgias
-disciple of Empedocles
-born in Sicily around the year 483 B.C.
-The philosophy of Gorgias was the exact opposite of Eleatism, and is summarized in three
theses:
First: nothing exists. Second: if anything existed, it cannot be known by man. Third: if it can
be known, it cannot be transmitted and explained to others.
-Gorgias rejects both the reality of being and that of non-being.
-Nothing exists, and there is no such reality as truth.
-Since we cannot speak of being, neither can we speak of any correspondence between
being and thought, or being and truth.
-Even if being were thinkable, it could not be communicated to others:
the word is not the object which really exists. Therefore, what we tell our neighbor is
not an existing reality but a simple word. Now a word is really different from its object.
-He not only divorces thought from being, he also cuts the link between our words and the
realities our words are meant to expressAlthough the word has no truth content, it can be used to
control minds and manipulate people: it is a great tool for domination; being so small and invisible, it
is yet capable of accomplishing feats only the gods can do.
SOCRATES, PLATO, AND ARISTOTLE
SOCRATES
-Gifted thinker of ancient Athens who helped lay the foundation of western philosophy
-Born in Athens in 469 BCE, Socrates was the son of a stonemason and a midwife.
-As a young man he is believed to have studied natural philosophy, looking at the various explanations of the
nature of the universe.
-He then became involved in the politics of the city-state and concerned with more down-to-earth ethical
issues, such as the nature of justice.
-His primary concern in philosophy was: How should we live? However, he was not interested in winning
arguments, or arguing for the sake of making moneya charge that was leveled at many of his
contemporaries. Nor was he seeking answers or explanationshe was simply examining the basis of the
concepts we apply to ourselves (such as good, bad, and just), for he believed that understanding what we
are is the first task of philosophy.
PLATO
-Socrates Student
-Founded the Academy: First institution for higher education
-First Western philosopher whose writings have survived
-Most of what we know about Socrates comes from Plato's writings
-The idealist or utopian or dreamer
-Born into a wealthy family in the second year of the Peloponnesian War
-Name means high forehead
-Left Athens when Socrates died but returned to open a school called the Academy in 385 BCE
Wrote 20 books, many in the dialectic style (a story which attempts to teach a specific concept) with Socrates
as the main character
Key works
c.399387 BCE Apology, Crito, Giorgias, Hippias Major, Meno, Protagoras (early dialogues)
c.380360 BCE Phaedo, Phaedrus, Republic, Symposium (middle dialogues)
c.360355 BCE Parmenides, Sophist, Theaetetus (late dialogues)
Realm of Forms-Ideas
Higher - Perfect
ULTIMATE REALITY
Not accessible to our senses
Non-Physical
Not Bound by Space and Time
Never Changing
Always is
ALLEGORY OF THE CAVE
The Allegory of the Cave, in which knowledge of the world is limited to mere shadows of reality and
truth, is used by Plato to explain his idea of a world of perfect Forms, or Ideas. To illustrate his theory,
Plato presents what has become known as the Allegory of the Cave. He asks us to imagine a cave
in which people have been imprisoned since birth, tied up facing the back wall in the darkness. They
can only face straight ahead. Behind the prisoners is a bright fire, which casts shadows onto the wall
they are facing. There is also a rampart between the fire and the prisoners along which people walk
and hold up various objects from time to time, so that the shadows of these objects are cast on the
wall. These shadows are all the prisoners know of the other of what Plato considers to be reality, also
solves the problem of finding constants in an apparently changing world.
Knowledge is obtained from senses i.e. knowledge of objects, colours, taste, touch etc. But Plato
does not consider this as real knowledge.
An opinion regarding any object, but this knowledge cannot be relied upon as the views of every
person differs regarding the same object.
Two types:
1. Noesis (reason)-higher knowledge that deals with grasping of complete or perfect knowledge
of the forms and ideas, especially the idea of the Good in the world of Forms and Ideas using
contemplation.
2. Dianoia (understanding)-lower type of knowledge associated with mathematical, abstract, or
scientific understanding. It relies on some assumptions, hypothesis, and imaginary from
physical or sensible world.
*Before achieving full or complete knowledge, the person has to go through the process of
recognizing his own ignorance or aporia.
ARISTOTLE
-Born at Stagira in northern Greece in 384 BC.
-367 347 BC Student at Platos Academy.
-Was not named head of Academy when Plato died; so, left Athens.
-Went to Macedonia and became tutor of the Alexander the Great when Alexander was 12
(343 BC).
-After Alexander became Emperor of all Greece, returned to Athens and founded his own
school, the Lyceum in 335 BC.
-After Alexander died (323 BC), anti-Macedonian feelings in Athens forced Aristotle to leave,
as he did not wish to suffer Socrates fate.
-Died one year later in Chalcis.
-Only about one fourth of Aristotles writings have survived. Most were lost when the Romans,
accidentally, burned down the great library of Alexandria, Egypt in 47 BC.
-All the works Aristotle had polished for publication were destroyed, including many dialogues
in the style of Plato but said to be infinitely superior in literary and philosophical quality.
-The works we have left are, essentially, the lecture notes Aristotle used for teaching at the
Lyceum.
-Still, in the Middle Ages, Aristotle was called, simply, The Philosopher.
-In his Divine Comedy, Dante christened Aristotle The Master of All Who Know.
Substance: a being or nature that carries existential reality by itself, and not as modifier of
another thing. (e.g., man, horse)
Quantity: modification of the material element of a being as to the effect of having massive
and measurable parts. Because the parts are massive they are also incomprenetrable, and
hence we also have the effect of dimension or extension. Mensurability may be gauged
according to mass, or dimension. (e.g., four-foot, five-foot)
Quality: a secondary formal feature of a being. By designating quality as secondary formal
feature, we denote that it does not specify or constitute the substantial nature, but is
accessional to it. (e.g., white, grammatical)
Relation: accessional reference of one being to another. (e.g., double, half)
Place: circumstantial determination as to a point in space, or on an area, below a surface, or in
a circumscribing body. (e.g., in the Lyceum, in the market-place)
Date: circumstantial determination as to time, i.e., a point, or a portion of certain duration.
(e.g., yesterday, last year)
Posture: secondary modification as regards placement of parts. (e.g., is lying, is sitting)
State: accessional determination as to external apparel. (e.g., has shoes on, has armor on)
Action: motion originating from a being and commonly including some change in another
being. (e.g., cutting, burning)
Passion: reception or result of an active influence from an agent. It should not be taken in the
narrow sense of damage or harm, but in the wider sense given. (e.g., being cut, being burned)
Substantial Change
Substantial change is the corruption (destruction) of one substance and the generation
(production) of another.
E. g. the formation of a water molecule.
In uniting, two atoms of hydrogen and one atom of oxygen cease to be hydrogen and
oxygen.
These separate substances cease to be and a new substance, the water molecule, is
generated (i. e. it starts to be.)
In uniting, the matter of the hydrogen atoms and of the oxygen atom has been put into a
new form, waterness.
The matters being put into a new form destroys the previous substances, the hydrogen
and oxygen atoms, and generates a new one, the water molecule.
The water molecule is NOT a composite of three parts (two parts hydrogen and one
part oxygen).
The water molecule is one, unified substance.
Direct analogy to biological generation.
When sperm and ovum unite, the result, the zygote, is NOT a composite (one
part sperm and one part ovum).
The zygote is one unified substance. It was generated when the matter of the
sperm and of the ovum was put into a new form, zygoteness.
Accidental Change
Accidents
-They are the modifications that substance undergo, but that do not change the kind of thing that
each substance is.
-Accidents only exist when they are the accidents of some substance.
-All these distinctions are basically logical, but in a sense they reflect the structure of reality. One
never finds any substance that we experience without some accidents, nor an accident that is not the
accident of a substance. Every dog, for instance, has some color, place, size. Nevertheless, it is
obvious that what a dog is is not the same as its color, or its size, etc.
-For Aristotle there are 10 categories into which things naturally fall. They are
Substance, and Nine Accidents:
Quantity, Quality, Relation, Action, Passion, Time, Place, Posture (the arrangement of parts),
and State (whether a thing is dressed or armed, etc.)
-The term "accident" is applied in philosophy to describe a mode of existence of being (an accidental
mode) or of an element in being, and also of a property of being. In the logic of natural language, an
accident means a category of predicates that predicate accidental features of a subject in a sentence.
-Accidents determine the wealth of content in the concrete being. Because of them, particular beings
have a wealth of content and create among themselves definite relations and are subject to definite
determinations (such as magnitude, color, and shape). They occupy a place and exist at a definite
time, undergo something or influence other things, etc..
-Although accidents do not exist independently in the same way as a whole thing, they are not
abstract or non-real. We will never encounter anywhere a color, shape, time, place or activity that
exists on its own, but we encounter trees of a certain color, things with definite shapes, people who
live at a particular time and in a particular place, etc..
-Accidents receive their being and reality from the subject or substance in which they are located; the
presence or absence of an accident affects the modification of the entire being. This modification can
include the being as a whole or merely some aspect of the being.
A substances losing or gaining a characteristic (an accident) while remaining the same
substance.
Dismantling a table and using the wood to make a chair is an example of substantial change.
The matter of the table has been put into a new form.
Painting a brown table red is an example of accidental change. The table both loses an
accident (browness) and gains one (redness) while remaining the same table.
An Important Distinction
Prime Matter: The fundamental stuff out of which substances are generated. Aristotelian
prime matter is not unlike modern physics mass/energy.
Second Matter: The substance(s) from which a new substance is generated when the prime
matter of the original substance(s) is put into a new form, e.g. wood is the second matter of a
wooden table.
BIAS
Cognitive bias is a limitation in objective thinking that is caused by the tendency for the human brain
to perceive information through a filter of personal experience and preferences. The filtering process
is called heuristics; its a coping mechanism that allows the brain to prioritize and process the vast
amount of input it receives each second. While the mechanism is very effective, its limitations can
cause errors that can be exploited.
It may not be totally possible to eliminate the brains predisposition to take shortcuts, but
understanding that bias exists can be useful when making decisions. A continually evolving list of
cognitive biases has been identified over the last six decades of research on human judgment and
decision-making in cognitive science, social psychology and behavioral economics. They include:
1. Anchoring effect the tendency for the brain to rely too much on the first instance of
information it received when making decisions later on.
2. Availability bias the tendency for the brain to conclude that a known instance is more
representative of the whole than is actually the case.
3. Bandwagon effect the tendency for the brain to conclude that something must be desirable
because other people desire it.
4. Bias blind spot the tendency for the brain to recognize anothers bias but not its own.
5. Clustering illusion the tendency for the brain to want to see a pattern in what is actually a
random sequence of numbers or events.
6. Confirmation bias the tendency for the brain to value new information that supports existing
ideas.
7. Framing effect the tendency of the brain to arrive at different conclusions when reviewing
the same information depending upon how the information is presented.
8. Group think the tendency for the brain to place value on consensus.
9. Negativity bias the tendency for the brain to subconsciously place more significance on
negative events than positive ones. This bias probably evolved as a survival technique.
Assuming the worst of a situation that turns out not to be dangerous is much safer than not
expecting danger that turns out to be present.
10. Recency bias the tendency for the brain to subconsciously place more value on the last
information it received about a topic.
11. Sunk cost effect the tendency for the brain to continue investing in something that clearly
isnt working in order to avoid failure.
12. Survivorship bias the tendency for the brain to focus on positive outcomes in favor of
negative ones. A related phenomenon is the ostrich effect, in which people metaphorically bury
their heads in the sand to avoid bad news.
Arguments
Philosophy is the art of constructing and evaluating arguments
Arguments are meant to be convincing
So philosophers must be sensitive to what makes an argument convincing
Thinking Critically
First step: Think Critically
What is the argument trying to say?
Why does the argument succeed, or not?
Whats good, bad, or indifferent?
The form of the argument
Whats the point?
How do we get to the point?
Structure
How do the parts of the argument fit together?
General Structure
In general, arguments consist of:
The thesis or position argued for
The conclusion
The reasons why the conclusion should be accepted
The premises
Usually this is written in standard form:
Premise 1 (Justification)
Premise 2 (Justification)
Therefore, Conclusion (Justification)
Deductive Reasoning
Starts with a general rule (a premise) which we know to be true. Then, from that rule, we
make a true conclusion about something specific. The process of reasoning from known facts
to conclusions. When you reason deductively, you can say therefore with certainty. If your
facts were firm to begin with, then your conclusions will also be firm.
From vague
To specific
Syllogism: An argument composed of two statements or premises (the major and minor
premises), followed by a conclusion.
For any given set of premises, if the conclusion is guaranteed, the arguments is said to be
valid.
If the conclusion is not guaranteed (at least one instance in which the conclusion does not
follow), the argument is said to be invalid.
BE CARFEUL, DO NOT CONFUSE TRUTH WITH VALIDITY!
A deductive argument is:
VALID if its premises necessarily lead to its conclusion.
That is, if you were to accept that the premises are all true, you must accept that the
conclusion is true.
SOUND if it is valid and you accept that all its premises are true.
A good, convincing argument is sound.
A bad argument is any other kind of argument.
VALIDITY + TRUE PREMISES* = SOUND
*or, at least, accepted premises
Examples
All people are mortal. Socrates is a person. Therefore, Socrates is mortal.
Sound and Valid
All people are mortal. My dog is mortal. Therefore, my dog is a person.
Invalid, but Sound
All green things make me sick. Oranges are green. Therefore, oranges make me sick.
Valid, but Not sound.
Whales know how to play hockey. Therefore, Canadians like winter.
Invalid and Not Sound
Notice
Validity does not depend on the truth of the premises.
All people are mortal. My dog is mortal. Therefore, my dog is a person.
The premises are true. But the argument is still invalid.
Soundness does not depend on the truth of the conclusion.
An argument can be bad even if the conclusion is obviously true.
Evaluating Deductive Arguments
Good arguments must be sound.
If you want to accept of an argument, you would have to show both validity and
soundness
Bad arguments can be bad in two ways:
Invalid
You can show that the conclusion does not follow from the premises
Unsound
You can show that at least one premise is unacceptable
Inductive Reasoning
The process of going from observations to conclusions.
This type of conclusion is sometimes called an inference.
Observing that something is true many times, then concluding that it will be true in all instances
Using the data to make a prediction
From Specific
To General
Argument by Analogy
One particular kind of inductive argument is an Argument by Analogy
Comparison of two or more things
Concludes that they share characteristic(s)
Because they share other characteristic(s)
Example:
Watches exhibit order, function, and design. They were also created by a
creator. The universe exhibits order, function, and design. Therefore, the
universe probably was created by a creator.
Evaluated like other inductive arguments
Fallacies
A Fallacy is a defect in an argument other than its having false premises. To detect fallacies, it is
required to examine the arguments content.
Fallacies of Reasoning
Here are some of the usually committed errors in reasoning and thus, coming up with false
conclusion and worse, distorting the truth.
a. Appeal to pity (Argumentum ad Misericordiam)
-A specific kind of appeal to emotion in which someone tries to win support for an argument or
idea by exploiting his or her opponents feelings of pity or guilt
-When it comes to determining the validity or factuality of a claim, any attempt to sway an
argument via emotion, rather than the quality of the logic or evidence, can be considered a
fallacy. This includes in some but not all cases the fallacy argument from adverse
consequences, or scare tactic
e.g.
Bad things will happen to us if you do not agree with my argument.
b. Appeal to Ignorance (Argumentum ad Ignorantiam)
-Whatever has not been proved false must be true, and vice versa.
-The fallacy of appeal to ignorance comes in two forms:
(1) Not knowing that a certain statement is true is taken to be a proof that it is false.
(2) Not knowing that a statement is false is taken to be a proof that it is true.
-The fallacy uses an unjustified attempt to shift the burden of proof. The fallacy is also called
Argument from Ignorance.
e.g.
Nobody has ever proved to me theres a God, so I know there is no God.
c. Equivocation
-This logical chain of reasoning of a term or a word several times, by giving the particular word
a different meaning each time.
-allows a key word or term in an argument to shift its meaning during the course of the
argument. The result is that the conclusion of the argument is not concerned with the same
thing as the premise(s).
e.g.
Human beings have hands; the clock has hands.
He is drinking from the pitcher of water; he is a baseball pitcher.
d. Composition
-This infers that something is true of the whole from the fact that it is true of some part of the
whole. The reverse of this fallacy is division.
-The composition fallacy occurs when someone mistakenly assumes that a characteristic of
some or all the individuals in a group is also a characteristic of the group itself, the group
composed of those members.
e.g.
Each human cell is very lightweight, so a human being composed of cells is also very
lightweight.
e. Division
-One reasons logically that something true of a thing must also be true of all or some of its
parts.
e.g.
The 2nd grade in Jefferson elementary eats a lot of ice cream
Carlos is a 2nd grader in Jefferson elementary
Therefore, Carlos eats a lot of ice cream
f. Against the Person (Argumentum Ad Homine)
-This fallacy attempts to link the validity of a premise to a characteristic or belief of the person
advocating the premise. However, in some instances, questions of personal conduct,
character, motives, etc., are legitimate if relevant to the issue.
e.g.
What she says about Johannes Keplers astronomy of the 1600s must be just so much
garbage. Do you realize shes only fourteen years old?
g. Appeal to force (Argumentum Ad Baculum)
-An argument where force, coercion, or the threat of force, is given as a justification for a
conclusion.
e.g.
If you dont accept X as true, I will hurt you.
h. Appeal to the People (Argumentum Ad Populum)
-An argument that appeals or exploits peoples vanities, desire for esteem, and anchoring on
popularity.
-refers to popular opinion or majority sentiment in order to provide support for a claim. Often
the "common man" or "common sense" provides the basis for the claim.
e.g.
All I can say is that if living together is immoral, then I have plenty of company.
How could you not believe in virgin births? Roughly two billion people believe in them, dont
you think you should reconsider your position?
i. False Cause (Post Hoc)
-Since that event followed this one, that event must have been caused by this one. This
fallacy is also referred to as coincidental correlation, or correlation not causation.
-mistakes correlation or association for causation, by assuming that because one thing follows
another it was caused by the other.
e.g.
A black cat crossed Babbs' path yesterday and, sure enough, she was involved in an
automobile accident later that same afternoon.
The introduction of sex education courses at the high school level has resulted in increased
promiscuity among teens. A recent study revealed that the number of reported cases of STDs
(sexually transmitted diseases) was significantly higher for high schools that offered courses in
sex education than for high schools that did not.
j. Hasty Generalization
-One commits errors if one reaches an inductive generalization based on insufficient evidence.
The fallacy is commonly based on a broad conclusion upon the statistics of a survey of a small
group that fails to sufficiently represent the whole population.
e.g.
All of those movie stars are really rude. I asked Kevin Costner for his autograph in a restaurant
in Westwood the other evening, and he told me to get lost.
Pit Bulls are actually gentle, sweet dogs. My next door neighbor has one and his dog loves to
romp and play with all the kids in the neighborhood!
k. Begging the Question (Petitio Principii)
-This is a type of fallacy in which the proposition to be proven is assumed implicitly or explicitly
the premise
-entails making an argument, the conclusion of which is based on an unstated or unproven
assumption. In question form, this fallacy is known as a COMPLEX QUESTION.
e.g.
Abortion is murder, since killing a baby is an act of murder.
Paranormal activity is real because I have experienced what can only be described as
paranormal activity.
l. Sweeping Generalization (Dicto Simpliciter)
-assumes that what is true of the whole will also be true of the part, or that what is true in most
instances will be true in all instances.
e.g. Muffin must be rich or have rich parents, because she belongs to ZXQ, and ZXQ is the richest
sorority on campus.
I'd like to hire you, but you're an ex-felon and statistics show that 80% of ex-felons recidivate.
m. Slippery Slop Argument
-This fallacy consists of arguing without good reasons that taking a particular step will
inevitably lead to another, normally catastrophic steps.
Example:
Mom: Those look like bags under your eyes. Are you getting enough sleep?
Jeff: I had a test and stayed up late studying.
Mom: You didnt take any drugs, did you?
Jeff: Just caffeine in my coffee, like I always do.
Mom: Jeff! You know what happens when people take drugs! Pretty soon the caffeine wont be
strong enough. Then you will take something stronger, maybe someones diet pill. Then,
something even stronger. Eventually, you will be doing cocaine. Then you will be a crack
addict! So, dont drink that coffee.
n. Straw Man Fallacy
-You commit the straw man fallacy whenever you attribute an easily refuted position to your
opponent, one that the opponent wouldnt endorse, and then proceed to attack the easily
refuted position (the straw man) believing you have undermined the opponents actual position.
Example (a debate before the city council):
Opponent: Because of the killing and suffering of Indians that followed Columbuss discovery
of America, the City of Berkeley should declare that Columbus Day will no longer be observed
in our city.
Speaker: This is ridiculous, fellow members of the city council. Its not true that everybody who
ever came to America from another country somehow oppressed the Indians. I say we should
continue to observe Columbus Day, and vote down this resolution that will make the City of
Berkeley the laughing stock of the nation.
*The speaker has twisted what his opponent said; the opponent never said, nor even indirectly
suggested, that everybody who ever came to America from another country somehow
oppressed the Indians.
o. Tautology: (a sub-category of circular argument)
-defining terms or qualifying an argument in such a way that it would be impossible to disprove
the argument. Often, the rationale for the argument is merely a restatement of the conclusion
in different words.
example: The Bible is the word of God. We know this because the Bible itself tells us so.
example: You are a disagreeable person and, if you disagree with me on this, it will only further prove
what a disagreeable person you are.
p. False Dilemma
-Unfairly presenting too few choices and then implying that a choice must be made among this
short menu of choices commits the false dilemma fallacy.
Example:
I want to go to Scotland from London. I overheard McTaggart say there are two roads to
Scotland from London: the high road and the low road. I expect the high road would be too
risky because its through the hills and that means dangerous curves. But its raining now, so
both roads are probably slippery. I dont like either choice, but I guess I should take the low
road and be safer.
*This would be fine reasoning is you were limited to only two roads, but youve falsely gotten
yourself into a dilemma with such reasoning. There are many other ways to get to Scotland.
q. Inconsistency
-The fallacy occurs when we accept an inconsistent set of claims, that is, when we accept a
claim that logically conflicts with other claims we hold.
e.g.
Im not racist. Some of my best friends are white. But I just dont think that white women love
their babies as much as our women do.
*That last remark implies the speaker is a racist, although the speaker doesnt notice the
inconsistency.
Rationalism vs Empiricism
The dispute between rationalism and empiricism concerns the extent to which we are dependent
upon sense experience in our effort to gain knowledge.
Rationalists claim that there are significant ways in which our concepts and knowledge are gained
independently of sense experience.
Empiricists claim that sense experience is the ultimate source of all our concepts and knowledge.
The Empiricist View of Knowledge (A posteriori-from the latter)
Empiricists have always claimed that sense experience is the ultimate starting point for all our
knowledge. The senses, they maintain, give us all our raw data about the world, and without this raw
material, there would be no knowledge at all. Perception starts a process, and from this process
come all our beliefs. In its purest form, empiricism holds that sense experience alone gives birth to all
our beliefs and all our knowledge. A classic example of an empiricist is the British philosopher John
Locke (16321704).
John Lockes View of the Human Mind as a Tabula Rasa
John Locke in his Essay Concerning Human Understanding restated the importance of the
experience of the senses over speculation and sets out the case that the human mind at birth is a
complete, but receptive, blank slate (scraped tablet or tabula rasa ) upon which experience imprints
knowledge.
Locke argued that people acquire knowledge from the information about the objects in the world that
our senses bring. People begin with simple ideas and then combine them into more complex ones.
Let us then suppose the mind to be, as we say, white paper void of all characters, without any ideas.
How comes it to be furnished? Whence comes it by that vast store which the busy and boundless
fancy of man has painted on it with an almost endless variety? Whence has it all the materials of
reason and knowledge? To this I answer, in one word, from EXPERIENCE.
Statements
-Statements expressed through a declarative sentence that has the element of truth or falsity,
since there is a knowledge claim being made in a statement.
Types of Statements
Analytic Statements
-The truth and falsity of the knowledge claim being made could be found within the statement
itself. In other words you do not have to go outside the statement to search whether the claim is true
or false.
-The denial of an analytic statement would lead to absurdity and contradiction. It would be
absurd for us to deny that, The sum of two and three is not five.
-Analytic statements are also known or identified as: truths of language, truths of reason, is of
identity, a priori, matters of logic, or formal statements.
Empirical Statements
-Empirical Statements are different from analytic statements because their truth or falsity
depend on the state of affairs being claimed.
-The knowledge claim being made is not dependent on definitions or tautologous statements
whose truths are contained within itself, but the truth or falsity being claimed by an empirical
statement rests on its correspondence with facts or with the current state of affairs being claimed.
-Its truth depends on the additional information or claim being made. Its truth or falsity of
statement would now depend on whether or not the state of affairs being described actually obtains at
the moment.
-The denial of an empirical statement would not lead to absurdity and contradiction. The
denial of the statement, will not be absurd or contradictory because the state of affairs being
described is one of the possibilities or contingencies happening in the empirical world. In other
words, you are not appealing to definitions in making claim; you are adding to contingent information
in the world. Furthermore, you will not be able to discover the truth of the statement by mere analysis
of the key terms contained. You have to go outside of the statement and to look and see whether the
state of affairs being claimed actually corresponds with the empirical world.
-Empirical Statements are also known or identified as in philosophical literature as truths of
fact, synthetic, matters of fact or a posteriori statements.
Types of Knowledge
Formal Knowledge
-corresponds to knowledge in the formal sciences whose main concern is the validation of their
knowledge claims within the formal system in their respective disciplines.
-systematic
-logical, mathematical, linguistic or any formal system whose method of validation depends entirely
on the particular system being used.
Empirical Knowledge
-It is the general term used to describe the different disciplines in the empirical sciences, ranging from
the hard sciences of physics, chemistry, biology, and others to the soft sciences of sociology, political
science, psychology, and others.
-takes emphasis and makes use of the data or the content from experience and its correspondence
with the state of affairs to establish the truth or falsity of their knowledge claims.
-it gives information about what the world is.
Strengths:
Simplicity
Appeal to common sense
Weaknesses
Difficulties pertaining to linguistics
Falls prey to circular reasoning
Awkwardness in application to mathematics
Leads to skepticism about the external world
Coherence Theory
Preferred by many idealists
For idealists, reality is like a collection of beliefs, which makes the coherence
theory particularly attractive
The coherence theory of truth states that if a proposition coheres with all the
other propositions taken to be true, then it is true.
The truth of a belief can only consist in its coherence with other beliefs; truth
comes in degrees
Coherence theorists hold that truth consists in coherence with a set of beliefs or
with a set of propositions held to be true, not just an arbitrary collection of
propositions
Strengths:
Makes sense out of the idea of mathematical truths
Ex: (5+2=7) is true because: 7=7 ; 1+6=7 ; 21/3=(2x3)+1; are all true
Weaknesses
Like the Correspondence theory, the Coherence theory falls prey to circular
reasoning
Ex: Proposition A is true because propositions B and C are true. But how
do you know B is true? Because proposition A and C are true. But what
external evidence is there to support the truth of any of these
propositions?
Pragmatism
William James is considered the father of pragmatism
However, in order to understand James presentation of pragmatism we must draw a
distinction between meaning and truth.
A sentence is meaningful only if believing it would make a practical difference in your
life as opposed to believing some alternative to it.
Example: Proposition A: There is a gaping hole in the middle of the cafeteria.
Would believing this proposition to be true make a practical difference in
your life?
It is safe to assume that one would take a path that avoids the
middle of the cafeteria if one believed that there was a gaping hole
there.
The previous example is an illustration of a meaningful proposition belief in it (or lack thereof)
makes a practical difference in ones life.
What about truth?
Only meaningful sentences can be true or false
James take on both the coherence and correspondence theories of truth is that
they are not competing theories, but rather different tools to be applied to beliefs
to see if those beliefs work
Ideas (which themselves are but parts of our experience) become true just insofar as they
help us to get into satisfactory relations with other parts of our experience,truth in our ideas
means their power to work William James, Pragmatism (49)
The key thing for James and pragmatism is that of an idea working
If believing that there is a gaping hole in the middle of the cafeteria prevents you
from falling and breaking a leg, or making a fool of yourself in front of that cute
boy from chapel, then that belief works. It is true.
Evaluating Opinions
Existentialism and Phenomenology (Read the book Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human
Person pages 28-30)