Phil 100 Exam 1

main arguments of intro to the study of philosophy and history of culture

argue that all men are philosophers that partake in spontaneous philosophy, but encourages people to actively seek deeper understanding by

1. critiquing past philosophers

2. understand history of philosophy

3. be proficient in different languages (to understand nuances) 

secondary argument of intro to the study of philosophy and history of culture 

“new” cultures and philosophies are never really “new” 

areas of philosophy aka types of claim/arguments

1. metaphysical

2. value/normative theory

3. logic

4. epistemological

metaphysical argument

study of existence

value/normative theory

study of “goodness” => aesthetic, justice, good/bad

logical argument

study of correct argumentation

epistemological argument

study of knowledge

basic components of arguments 1

premeses and conclusions 

a syllogism contains

premise and conclusions

what do syllogisms help with

• organize claims leading to reasoning

• attempts to persuade of claim

• premesis should infer conclusion to distinguish

two types of argument

1. deductive

2. inductive

deductive reasoning

prove logical necessity (valid/invalid, sound/unsound) => need to believe conclusion if you believe premises

premises need to be and conclusion needs to be for a successful deductive argument

valid and sound

inductive reasoning

prove high probability of conclusion (no sequential logic) following strong/weak, cogent/not cogent structure

premises need to be and conclusion needs to be for a successful inductive argument

strong, cogent

cogent

a clear, logical, and convincing argument

basic component of argument 2

structure and content (need both for solid argument)

structural dimension

how arguments are structured 

statements/claims assessment

statements and claims are first assessed as true or false, then together make the conclusion

philosophical assumptions in arguments

all arguments make assumptions. if they are false, the whole argument is void, however

foundational philosophical principles

starting points of arguments

importance of assumptions in arguments

• argument validity

• understand bigger pictures of philosopher’s views (if he thinks this, then he likely thinks this)

philosophical implications in arguments

implications are what could follow if we agreed with what is argued (further conclusions)

false dichotomy

logical fallacy where an argument presents only two options or outcomes as the only possibilities, when in reality, other options or a spectrum of possibilities exist

takeaway from platos’ republic

ordinary knowledge is simply what is and what is not whereas true knowledge is what really is

what are the forms in plato’s republic

absolute realities (true knowledge and pure understanding)

secondary argument of plato’s republic

philosophers should rule because they wish to understand the whole of knowledge

priori truth

something we think/believe to be true by mind alone (without seeing an without experiment, through reason)

ex: car is a vehicle cuz by definition it’s a type of vehicle

posteriori truth

truth comes from experience and experimentation (ex: raining you have to go out and see it)

universals

conceptual ideas and actual things represented by conceptual idea (ex: chairs look different but they both chairs)

particulars

specific instance of concept (ex: wooden desk chair is a specific instance of universal concept of chair)

socratic method

a western approach to philosophy where ideas are hypothesis that you test by questioning, leading to results and thoery

what term is used to demonstrate the type of questioning done with socratic method

stingray: confuse people with questions lead to learning and questioning (dialogical reasoning)

Gramsci spontaneous v critical philosophy

anyone can be a philosopher (spontaneous) but you should work to become a critical philosopher to better understand truths

socrates epistemology

knowledge exists in us innately

socrates argument for innate knowledge

because people gain information from observations and experiences, and make sense of them through questioning which is not acquired externally which means it comes from an internal source, or recollection, which is to remember something already present in us

terms socrates defines

• faculty

• sphere

• lovers

• true philosophy

• the forms

• knowledge, ignorance, opinion

faculty (socrates)

inherent abilities of the soul

lovers (socrates)

lovers love the whole, not just the parts

true philosophy (socrates)

a lover of all wisdom 

the forms (socrates)

absolute, eternal, and unchanging

knowledge vs opinion

knowledge: being (reality)

ignorance: nonbeing

opinion: seeming

first philosophy

the search for a “first" principle on which all other knowledge follows, similar to self evident truths (statement that needs no further proof)

Descartes two epistemological methods

1. first philosophy

2. methodological doubt

methodological doubt

aka skepticism 

persuasive accounts for why some knowledge can be doubted, which weakens claim that that is true knowledge (should not be able to doubt true knowledge)

cogito ergo sum

descartes first principle; concludes that just by thinking, one exists (doubt everything until you can’t doubt that by doubting, = thinker, thinker = exist)

wax example

descartes=> wax from honeycomb has distinct qualities (like honeycomb) and when you melt it it changes (doesn’t smell like honeycomb, doesn’t feel like it etc) yet you still know it is wax => rationalism

rationalism 

all foundations of knowledge start from rational mind, tue truest understanding of things are our rational understandings 

rationalism favors what kind of acquisition of knowledge

reason over experience

pragmatism

assesses the truth of meaning of theories or beliefs in terms of the success of their practical application

traditional definition of philosophy (subjective and objective)

subjective: when a point or condition is rooted soley in one’s individual or particular viewpoint 

objective: when a truth or condition is the case independent of the subject’s viewpoint 

James’s theory of religion

religion should be used pragmatically because there is no use thinking of religion beyond what it can be used for 

James’ theory of truth

truth is individual (subjective) because an individual’s conception of life is how they live their life, but is also objective because individual truths are verified in the context of society aka truth is a process

empiricism

all knowledge originates from sensory experience

scientific imperialism

science has previously been too narrow, failing to consider its context in society

epistemological pluralism

areas of sciences and humanities intersect and support each other, it is not binary and exclusive

midgley subjective vs objective knowledge

not binary, but rather a plane

examples to explain epistemolofical pluralism

1. Map: everyone creates different maps based on what they experience going to a certain place. Overtime, you combine those to make one map of the place 

2. aquarium: holes in aquarium allow you to see certain parts of the aquarium. you can’t see it all at once, but you know it is part of something bigger

how to develop philosophical critique

1. understand details of view you are critiquing

2. isolate idea/issue you surround critique around

3. directly and clearly explain idea you are challenging

traditional forms of critique

1. inconsistent

2. invalid logic

3. problematic implications

4. misrepresents ideas/theories

5. ambiguous claims or unclear argument 

6. flawed examples 

7. alternative view that is stronger

8. lack of support/evidence

standpoint epistemology

alternative/social epistemology: social processes influence knowledge based on where you are in the social sphere

Collins’ three methods in black feminist thought

1. dialogue

2. ethics of care

3. accountability

Collins dialogue

formulate knowledge through shared experience, get everyone’s thoughts on the table

Collins Ethics of Care

empathy leads to connection (emotional validity)

Collins personal accountability

people should be held accountable for their knowledge claims 

collins knowledge vs wisdom

knowledge= principle based

wisdom= based on lived experiences

connected knowers v separate knowers

connected: connects emotions with information

separate: feelings and emotions separate from information (perpetuates systems of power)

dubois double consciousness

black people see themselves but also see themselves through the eyes of oppressors