PHILOSOPHY UNIT 3/4

Aristotle - humans are…

Rational, Social, Procedural

Hobbes' State of Nature

solitary, nasty, brutish, and short

Locke's State of Nature

No mutual obligation, humans have an irrevocable right to life, liberty, and property

Rousseau's State of Nature

Solitary and idyllic, society is the cause of mankind's problems

Social Contract

The implied agreement between the state and the populace, wherein the populace relinquishes their freedoms in exchange for safety and security

Hobbes' Social Contract

People must hand over their freedoms to an absolute authority, even if that authority is cruel, to avoid the state of nature

Leviathan

Hobbes' absolute ruler

Locke's Social Contract

Must meet the general interest. If not, then the populus has a right to revolution. The contract is in place to protect life, liberty and property.

Tacit consent

Locke - if you benefit from society, then you implicitly agree to the burdens it places upon you

Rousseau's Social Contract

People must set aside individual ego to create a collective body advocating for the general will. The legitimacy of the state stems from it's people's consent.

Hobbes on the State's Authority

Leviathan is needed to prevent war/state of nature

Bentham on the State's Authority

The government is best able to maximise utility as a unified body

Rousseau on the State's Authority

We have lost our idyllic past due to society, so must rely on the collective will to ensure general well-being

Hume on the State's Authority

No social contract is legitimate, as consent cannot be given under coercion. The government is built on violence and conquest. Our allegiance to the state is out of necessity.

Mills on the State's Authority

Only permitted to act to prevent harm to others

Rawls on Civil Disobedience

Justified under 3 conditions. It is:

1. In response to clear injustice

2. Necessary

3. Public

(4.) Proportionate

Must lead to a decrease in harm

Aquinas on Civil Disobedience

We have no duty to obey unjust laws, especially if they undermine God's law [for today's context, our personal morals]

Distributive Justice

Justice/fairness in the allocation of society's resources

Plato on Justice

"Everyone gets what they deserve"

Marx on Justice

"Give to each according to his needs and take from each according to his ability"

Merit-Based Justice

Everyone gets what they deserve. Minimal redistribution. Society should reward people for certain actions and behaviours.

Needs-Based Justice

People aren't born equal, through no fault of their own. As such, we should redistribute resources based on need to offset this.

Rawls' Justice

Justice is fairness. Society should be more equal.

Rawls' Original Position Thought Experiment

If a group of individuals created rules for society under the veil of ignorance, they would want a more equal society and create

1. The principle of equal liberties

2. The difference principle

The former has precdence over the latter

The Principle of Equal Liberties

Each person is to have the right to the most extensive system of liberties, compatible with equal liberties for all

Difference Principle

Socioeconomic inequalities are permitted if they are of benefit to the least advantaged

Nozik's Justice

Justice is entitlement. So long as there is justice in acquisition, people have the right to do whatever they want, even if it creates inequalities. Redistribution is unjust.

Liberty

The freedoms we enjoy in society

Isaiah Berlin's Positive Liberty

Relates to one's ability to act upon their free will and live to the fullest potential (e.g. healthcare)

Isaiah Berlin's Negative Liberty

Relates to the freedom from others' interference in our actions, focusing on external restraint (e.g. voting)

Mill's Harm Principle

The only justifiable reason for the state to limit freedoms is to prevent one from enacting harm upon another

Economic Liberty

The freedom to earn and spend money

Social Liberty

The freedom to behave and express yourself as you wish

Political Liberty

The freedom to take part in your government via voting, assembly, criticism, etc.

Equality of Outcome

Resources should be distributed evenly to all of sociey's members

Equality of Opportunity

People should have the same capacity to acquire wealth

Egalitarianism

Political doctrine arguing for the removal of social, political, and economic inequalities

Pluralsim

Different beliefs, backgrounds, and lifestyles can coexist and participate in the same society

Secularism

The separation of religion [Church] and government [state]

Liberalism

Individuals should have maximum and equal freedom to act as they wish. The only justification for government interference is to prevent harm.

Libertarianism

Individual liberty with limited government (Liberalism on steroids)

Socialism

Society should uphold social equality and justice (very wide umbrella term, use very sparingly)

Plato's Ship of Fools

You would want a sailor running a boat rather than a person who is not an expert in sailing. Therefore, individuals should not decide who rules because they are not experts in ruling.

Democracy

"rule by the people" - the people get a say in who rules

Liberal Democracy

Representative democracy abiding by the principles of liberalism. Has free, competitive elections, equal protection of human rights, and a separation of powers.

Social Democracy

Representative democracy promoting social justice. Otherwise similar to liberal democracy.

Epsitemology

The branch of philosophy concerning the basis and justification for knowledge

Rationalism

Knowledge stems from the mind. Knowledge of the world is objective, as it arises from reason and logic.

A priori

Ideas which are true independent of experience

innate Ideas

Ideas that don't require empirical evidence and are present prior to birth

Plato's Slave Boy

Plato teaches a slave boy with no education math, proving that mathematical knowledge is present from birth. This thought experiment is highly flawed, so don't use it.

Logical necessity

Things that must be true and cannot be conceived as otherwise (e.g. 3 > 2)

Cogito ergo sum

"I think, therefore I am" - René Descartes

Empericism

Knowledge stems from the senses

A posteriori

Knowledge derived from sense experience

Tabula rasa

We are born as blank slates and acquire knowledge via experience

Simple Ideas

Locke. Pure, uncomplicated ideas that arise from the senses

Complex Ideas

Locke. Ideas derived from multiple simple ideas.

Primary Qualities

Objective attributes of objects which we can't really debate, e.g. size, mass, motion

Secondary Qualities

Subjective attributes that are reliant on perception, e.g. colour, smell, taste

Scepticism

Certainty is required for knowledge, and certainty is basically impossible to achieve. Descartes.

Positivism

The only true knowledge is that derived through science and the application of the scientific method

Karl Popper's Falsification Principle

A scientific claim must be capable of being proven false, or it is pseudoscience.

Tripartite Theory of Knowledge

Knowledge is a justified, true belief (JTB)

Gettier Cases

Cases where JTB applies but only through luck (e.g. a broken clock being right twice a day)

Hume's Problem of Induction

Past observations cannot logically justify future predictions

Objectivity of science

Limited in practice due to factors like human perception, theories and expectations, institutional constraints, and cultural and historical context

Reductionism

Science progresses linearly by reducing complex systems to simpler components that are more manageable to study

Falsificationism (Popper)

Progress is from conjectures and refutations. Can only be done through the process of elimination, not by confirmation.

Relativism (Kuhn)

Science progresses through paradigm shifts. Paradigms are incommensurable.

Paradigm

A series of methodologies, theories, and practises common to a specific study.

Paradigm Shift (Kuhn)

When errors and conflicting evidence accumulate, causing a radical change in the paradigm.

Theory-Ladeness

What scientists perceive is altered by their preexisting biases. Observation is not objective.

Abrahamic God

Omniscient, Omnipotent, and Omnibenevolent

Traditional Epistemic Arguments for God

Argue that God exists so belief is logical

Ontological Argument

God must exist because the concept of a non-existent God is self-contradictory

Anslem's Argument

1. A more perfect version of God can't be imagined

2. God exists as an idea in the mind

3. A being that exists in the mind AND reality is better than one only in the mind

4. We can't imagine something greater than God

C. God exists

Cosmological Argument

The universe requires a "cause" to prevent infinite regression. God must be the cause.

Aquinas's Argument

1. Everything that exists has a cause

2. The Universe exists

C1. The Universe has a Cause

3. If the Universe has a cause, then a powerful being that exists outside of causation must have caused it

C2. A powerful being that exists outside of causation caused the universe

Teleological Argument

There is a high degree of order in the universe, suggesting an intelligent designer exists

Paley's Watchmaker Analogy

If we saw a watch (the universe) in a barren desert, we'd assume someone (God) made it.

Natural Evil

Evil as a result of nature/chance

Moral Evil

Evil as a result of human action

Logical Problem of Evil

Claims that the existence of God is incompatible with evil (deductive)

Evidential Problem of Evil

Claims that the existence of evil makes it unlikely that God exists (inductive)

Epicurus's Problem of Evil

If God is able (omnipotent) and willing (omnibenevolent) to prevent evil, it should not exist. Evil exists, so God does not.

Mackie's Inconsistent Triad

Omnipotence, Omnibenevolence, and Evil

Hume's Argument Against God

We can only justify believing what the evidence suggests, and the evidence suggests imperfection exists. Therefore, a perfect God cannot exist.

Theodicies

Arguments against the problem of evil

Augustine's Theodicy

All evil is either sin or punishment for sin. Evil originates from Adam and Eve's fall rather than God

Plantinga's Free Will Theodicy

Evil is a result of free will. Life would be meaningless without free will, so God must allow free will to maximise good and, thereby, evil.

Irenaeus' Theodicy

We were made in God's image, not likeness. God is like a parent punishing our bad behaviour through evil, ultimately allowing us to step towards his likeness.

John Hick's Soul-Making Theodicy

Epistemic distance makes choosing to do good in the face of evil more moral (rather than being out of obligation)

Pragmatic Arguments for God

Regardless of whether God truly exists or not, it's beneficial for us to believe He does

Pascal's Wager

The costs and benefits are so extreme that we should believe in God

William James' Irrational Beliefs

Believing something without evidence is justifiable if it's a live (plausible), forced, and momentous option

W.K. Clifford on Epistemic Responsibility

We are morally obligated to withhold belief on matters without evidence

Conflict Model

The aims, methods, and objectives of faith and reason are the same, so there's a genuine rivalry

Incompatibilist Model

The aims, methods, and objectives of faith and reason are so distinct, so they can coexist

Weak Compatibility Model

Commonality is possible between faith and reason, though both maintain distinct realms of evaluation and cogency