GROUP-6 PRESENTATION

METHODS OF PHILOSOPHY🤞
 LOGICAL ANALYSIS
LOGICAL ANALYSIS
 It is a method determining whether the assertion offered as reason for
accepting the assertion justify the acceptance in the way the speaker
intended.When a speaker assert a thing it becomes an argument. An
argument consists of two or more statements, one of which is a
conclusion and the others are premise.Logical analysis is not critical
analysis.To critically analyze is to evaluate the plausibleness,
reasonableness, adequacy or inadequacy of a fact.The purpose of
critical analysis is to convince the reader or listener to accept or not to
accept such belief in question..
 This matters belongs to the field of science, psychology, English and
other disciplines. In logical analysis, however the speaker has to
establish relationship between premise and conclusion in argument
which reasoning may either be in deductive or indeductive
argumentation. Deductive or indeductive reasoning is a method of
logical analysis that belongs to the field or philosophy. The purpose
of logical analysis is not to win in an argumentation but to use the
argument as a means of deciding which belief option is the most and
closest to the truth.
 The benefit of this approach is multifaceted. First, it allows the reader of an
argument to get practice at identifying solid argument, and therefore serves the
purpose not only of aiding refutation, but also makes one less prone to making
flawed arguments themselves. Second, this is a much systemized approach to
philosophy, which are relies on methods of deductions and one’s ability to
master said methods, As a result it gives the arguers a relatively high level of
confidence in their work, so long as they have reason to presume their promises
to be true. This method cannot be employed when responding to inductive
arguments, since we do not find these particularly persuasive or complex
enough to require in depth analysis.
METHODS OF SYSTEMATIC

 Methods of Systemic Doubt - This doubt is not a casual doubt,

which is handed to us by our parent, teachers, relatives and
friends.The “doubt” as a method of philosophy is called the
methodological doubt or indubitable or sometimes referred to as
Cartesian doubt advocated by Rene Descartes (1596-1650), a
French philosopher.
 He said that when we bring to think philosophically, the first
thing we should do is to doubt everything of which we cannot
be absolutely certain. Since, there are many beliefs (true or
false) that surround us, the person must distance himself from
the whole mixture of beliefs and then as a fresh start, he may
begin intellectually by reasoning the most solid foundation
against this method, it is certainly an effective way of
overcoming unreflective body of traditional beliefs.
 PHENOMENOLOGICAL METHOD

 4. Phenomenological Method. This methods of philosophy was associated with

Edmond Husserl (1859-1938) a German philosopher who postulated
trancedental phenomenology. The worst phenomenon is derived from a Greek
word Phaenesthai, which means “to appeal” in phenomenological method, we
describe ourselves and the word around us on the basis of subjective
experience, which is often referred to us “lived experience”. In the using the
method, we suspend our categorical commitments and describe what appears
in this world, such that our observations presuppose out categories and
theories.This method is useful when encountering a field of philosophy for the
first time.This can be combined with the self-directed deconstruction method.
PHILOSOPHICAL DIALOGUE
 5. Philosophical Dialogue a person who employs this method must
employ the other methods listed here in order to conduct the
conversation. A spoken dialogue is much more effective in giving life to
ideas.The usefulness of this method is that it brings a philosopher into
contact with many ideas in a short period of time, especially when there
are more than two opinions being argued.It also creates a community
mentality in which those of different viewpoints are engaged in real
conversation for the common goal of truth seeking. In other words,
people discuss to work out a problem together, rather than isolation.
HISTORICAL METHOD

 6. Historical MethodIn this method, there is value in explaining

the implications of an argument in a society. However, negative
implications do not simply imply an absence of truth nor do
positive ones imply its presence.
COMPARATIVE-DESCRIPTIVE METHOD

 7. Comparative-Description Method - This is valuable learning tool, since

we often to understand concepts in relations to what we already know.
So if someone understands the social contract of Rousseau, you be better
able to explain the subtitles of Hubbes argument by comparison.
However this approach is not much useful, since it does not really
generate any new knowledge, and though it is a fast-track to
understanding, it does not seem to do anything that could not be
accomplished by careful reading of original texts.
COMPARATIVE-CONSTRUCTIVE METHOD

 This is very useful method for creating new

ideas, which are extremely important to the
process of truth seeking.
DECONSTRUCTION METHOD

 9. Deconstruction Method this method is useful in specific situations. It’s

value is that it allows a thinker to challenge his own cultural
preconceptions and thus gain a somewhat, more objective point of
view.What it does not do is to prove an argument incorrect, since it
simply points out that there is a reason to doubt.This approach is most
commonly used when looking at situations regarding ethics.
 In closing, Logic does not necessarily prove anything. Many
people can play at games of rhetoric and logic and suggest that
as proof. This is not true. Truth must be verifiable and be able to
undergo rigorous testing. The method of philosophy, thus, can
lead to window and truth.