Philosophy Prelim 1

inductive vs. deductive arguement

Inductive: premises give probable support for conclusion, assumptions
Deductive: if premises true, conclusion must be true

syllogism

deductive argument: 1. general premise, 2. specific premise, 3. logically must follow

valid argument

conclusion makes logical sense from premises (premises do not need to be true)

sound arguement

true premises, logical/valid conclusion

counterexamples

specific scenario that disproves an argument, exception

begging the question

conclusion is assumed to be true in argument/premise

reductio ad absurdum

absurd thing that is exception/contradiction to argument. assume it is true, follow argument to result, proof by contradiction

equivocating

using same term w/ two different senses (ex. man is all humans vs. man is not female)

relationship between knowledge and belief

beliefs are not necessarily true. for something to be knowledge, must be true and believed (justified true belief)

“Brain in a Vat” and Meditation 1

BIAV is example of being totally deceived. external deception: demon doubt, however humans cannot invent new colors/mathematical truths

Aristotelian vs. Mechanists method of explaining the world

Aristotelian: everything has a purpose, ex. seed grows because purpose is to become tree

Mechanists: not focused on purpose, everything can be explained by math and scientific laws

tension between church and mechanism

church concerned mechanism reduced the idea of higher beings (God)

foundationalist

all beliefs begin from absolute/foundational truths

alternative approach to knowledge

coherentism: mutual consistency, no singular foundation

Descartes’ goal/project in the meditations

He is foundationalist, rip back until left with only foundations to prove what he can and cannot believe.

how Method of Doubt functions

stripping away every belief that can possibly be doubted, goal is to find absolute, unshakable foundation for true knowledge

General Sensory Doubt

senses may decieve us, but if nothing is obviously wrong, you dont have to doubt senses. absurd to doubt where you are and what you are seeing

dream doubt

internal doubt: you are dreaming, what you are seeing may not be happening, human mind cannot create color or mathematical truths

evil genius doubt

there is a demon with higher powers decieving you. you cannot trust anything, not even color/mathematical truths. nothing survives except the fact that I exist

Cogito

i think, therefore I am

objection to Cogito (spit)

I spit, therefore I am. Can dream any action, including spitting

objection to Cogito (raining)

In the phrase “It is raining”, there is no subject. the “I” in “I think” may not refer to anything

ultimate foundation for knowledge

I think, therefore I am. (I am a thinking being)

Example of reductio

You should never lie. Suppose you never lie, then if someone asks if your friend is home so they can kill them, you must say where they are.

Dualism vs. materialism

Dualism: I am a soul than can exist without a body, mental substance and physical substance are independent of each other

Materialism: contrary to dualism, only physical matter/substance exists

Dependency problem

Mental states depend on physical states, examples: phineas gage, concussions, neurological disorders, pain, learning is accompanied by physical and chemical changes in the brain

Princess Elizabeth objection to Descartes

If the soul is only a thinking substance, how can it control the body to bring out involuntary actions? Mind creates physical changes. extension is the soul, but extension is needed for interactions between physical bodies