PHIL EXAM 1

Empirical (A Posteriori) Knowledge

Knowledge obtained after observation, learned through experience (e.g., knowing fire is hot after touching it).

A Priori Knowledge

Knowledge obtained before observation, known independently of experience, and always true (e.g., 2+2=4).

Contingent Truths

Truths that are true but could have been otherwise; they depend on how the world actually is (e.g., 'It's raining in Colorado today').

Necessary Truths

Truths that are true in all possible worlds; they have to be true and cannot be denied without contradiction (e.g., 'All bachelors are unmarried').

Descriptive Facts (Science)

Statements that merely describe reality as it is, without judgment, and are always true (e.g., 'The Earth orbits the Sun').

Evaluative Facts (Philosophy)

Statements that assign value or make claims about value, describing the way things should be (e.g., 'The Earth is beautiful').

Physical Objects

Objects that exist in space and time and can be touched and felt (e.g., a water bottle).

Abstract Objects

Objects that do not exist in space and time but are real in a conceptual sense (e.g., numbers, the concept of justice).

Philosophy (Questions)

Asks conceptual questions (e.g., 'Do we have free will?'), using reasoning, logic, and thought experiments (a priori).

Science (Questions)

Asks empirical questions (e.g., 'What brain processes happen during decision-making?'), using observation, measurement, and experimentation (empirical).

Karl Popper's view on defining science

Important to define science properly to identify what makes it successful for building reliable knowledge and avoiding false beliefs, and to prevent pseudoscience from gaining undeserved credibility.

Falsification (Popper)

The defining characteristic of science; actively seeking evidence that could prove a theory wrong. Only claims that are falsifiable/testable count as scientific.

Pseudoscience (Attitude)

Avoids criticism, explains away any counterexamples, and never admits being wrong (e.g., astrology).

Science (Attitude)

Welcomes testing and criticism, admits errors, and revises theories when contradicted by evidence.

Problem with Falsificationism

Scientists shouldn’t abandon a theory immediately when it is falsified; a single experimental failure doesn't necessarily disprove a theory. Issues can arise from faulty observations or equipment, and useful parts of a theory might be prematurely rejected.

Deductive Inference

Reasoning where the truth of premises guarantees (100%) the truth of the conclusion. If premises are true, conclusion must be true (e.g., All cats are mammals; Tom is a cat; Therefore Tom must be a mammal).

Inductive Inference

Reasoning where the truth of premises makes the conclusion likely, but not guaranteed. It generalizes past observations to probable future outcomes (e.g., My roommate never lied before about C4C being closed; So, C4C is closed).

Uniformity of Nature (UN)

Hume's idea that the future will resemble the past; nature follows a consistent pattern, assumed for making predictions ('Objects we have not examined will be similar… to objects… we have examined').

UN Presupposed by Scientific Reasoning

Scientists rely on the assumption that nature works consistently for hypotheses and predictions; without UN, past data couldn't predict future outcomes (e.g., gravity will continue to make objects fall).

Hume's Problem of Induction

Scientific claims and inductive reasoning are ultimately unjustified because we cannot know that the UN is true (neither a priori nor a posteriori, due to circularity).

Circularity in Induction

Attempting to prove the Uniformity of Nature a posteriori requires assuming UN is true, creating a circular argument (e.g., 'I’ve observed UN to be true up until now, so UN is true').

Correlation

When two variables occur or change together, but one does not necessarily cause the other (e.g., ice cream sales and drowning incidents rise in summer).

Causation

When one variable directly influences or produces an effect on another (e.g., smoking causes lung cancer); there is a dependent relationship.

A Causes B (Causal Relation)

Variable A directly leads to Variable B (e.g., attending class leads to good grades).

B Causes A (Causal Relation)

Variable B directly leads to Variable A (e.g., good grades lead to increased attendance).

C Causes Both A and B (Causal Relation)

A third, hidden variable C is the common cause of both A and B (e.g., motivation leads to both good grades and attendance).

Controlled Experiments

Tests where all factors except the one being tested are held constant to determine the effect of a specific variable, needed to infer causal connections by isolating effects.

Randomization in Experiments

Randomly assigning subjects to groups in controlled experiments to evenly distribute all possible unmeasured factors, reducing bias and strengthening the causal inference.

Hume on Causal Inference

Causal inference is not justified because we only observe constant conjunction (two things happening together), not a 'force' connecting them; expectation comes from habit, not necessary connection.

Hume on What Happens Instead of Causation

Instead of causation, there is consistent conjunction and habits of mind. We notice patterns and our minds automatically form expectations, projecting a 'necessary connection' that is a mental prediction, not an objective reality.

Time-Reversal Symmetry

The idea that basic physical laws work the same forward and backward in time; some events look very possible if played in reverse (e.g., billiard balls colliding).

Problem of Time-Reversal Symmetry for Causation

Physical laws with time-reversal symmetry cannot tell us which is the cause and which is the effect, suggesting causation is something our minds add rather than being inherent in the laws of physics.