Philosophy key consents

Flashcards on Philosophy key consents of Descartes and Hume

Descartes' Meditations - Meditation 1 Aims

Aims to eliminate false ideas from his beliefs, free us of our prejudices, find a firm foundation to build all knowledge upon, withdraw the mind from the senses, and provide firm foundations upon which we can do the sciences.

The method of doubt

Eliminating all doubt, Mistrust of the senses, The dream argument, The deceiving God argument, The evil demon (a tool to force Descartes to believe all the things he usually takes to be highly probable are false).

The Cogito

I am I exist It is impossible to doubt that you are thinking because doubt is a kind of thinking. The mind is a thinking thing says Descartes

Meditation 3 Overview

Proving the existence of God

Clear and distinct rule

Whatever I clearly and distinctly perceive to be true, is true!

The Trademark argument

Descartes has the idea of an infinite perfect being in his mind. Nothing comes from nothing. The idea must have a cause and that cause must have as much reality as the effect. The cause of this idea can’t be Descartes himself as he is imperfect and finite. Therefore a perfect and infinite being must exist to have caused his idea of God.

Why Descartes need to prove God exists?

To overcome the deceiving God of Med.1 and thus establish certainty in a priori reasoning; A perfect being wouldn’t let him be deceived since “all fraud and deception depend on some defect; To act as guarantor of “clear and distinct” ideas; To move beyond the cogito.

The Cartesian circle

Descartes reasoning is circular – he starts by talking about clearly and distinctly perceiving his idea of God, but then uses his proof for God to justify trusting his clear and distinct perceptions

Dream Argument

Descartes argues that while he may believe he is experiencing reality, he could very well be dreaming. This raises doubts about the reliability of sensory experiences—he questions whether he is truly in his dressing gown or writing by the fire.

Provisional Conclusion

Explores the nature of perception and reality, considering the possibility that one's senses might be deceived by dreams.

The deceiving God argument

Descartes grapples with the concept of an all-powerful God and the implications of such a being on human perception and understanding. He posits that the very idea of God suggests that if such a God exists, it is within His power to deceive.

Problems with counter objections that god wouldn’t do that

This philosophical discourse, Descartes grapples with the relationship between the perception of God’s goodness and the phenomenon of deception. He challenges the notion that a supremely good God would never allow for deception by providing a nuanced argument surrounding the nature of existence and perception.

God is not a deceiver

Addresses the possibility of God's deception. He emphasises that his concept of God embodies all perfections which leads him to conclude that a perfect being cannot be a deceiver

The malicious Demon -why the first part isn’t enough

Descartes acknowledges the difficulty of relinquishing deeply held beliefs; He recognises that many beliefs seem reasonable even after doubt; To prevent reverting to untrustworthy beliefs, he decides to treat them as false; This mental commitment is essential to developing a more solid foundation for knowledge.

Malicious Demon

Explores the concept of radical skepticism through the idea of a malicious demon. He imagines a powerful, deceitful being who attempts to manipulate his perceptions and beliefs

The nature of the human mind, and how it is better know than the body

Delves into the nature of human existence and the certainty of self-awareness. He opens by revisiting the serious doubts he previously expressed, emphasising his goal of discovering undeniable truth to pave the way towards greater knowledge.

cogito

Existence is certain

Proving god exists

Reflects on his previous meditations and reaffirms the foundation of his new philosophical inquiry. He emphasises his intention to detach from sensory experiences, suggesting that perceptions of physical objects may be deceptive.

Expanding his philosophical inquiry beyond the foundational assertion “I think, therefore I am.

Clear perception is that which is immediately apparent and accessible to a focused mind while a distinct perception possesses an additional quality—it is not only clear but also sharply delineated from other perceptions.

The classification of thoughts

Thoughts into categories to determine their truthfulness; Ideas, Volitions/Emotions/Judgments

Difference between natural impulses and natural light

Instinctual drives or feelings that lead one to believe in the existence of external objects. Rational insight or clear understanding that provides undeniable truths

Definitions: Substance, Accident, Mode

An entity that can exist independently; A characteristic or property of a substance; A specific determination of an accident

The causal principle

That the cause of an effect must possess as much reality or perfection as the effect itself.

First proof for the existence of god

He indicates that if an individual has an idea of something that possesses more reality or perfection than themselves, they could not be the source of that idea

The idea of god could not have come from inside of me

asserts that the concept of God, defined as an infinite substance that is independent, supremely intelligent, and powerful, cannot originate from a finite being like himself.

Second proof of the existence of god

Centres on personal existence and the necessity of a divine creator.The very existence of the idea of God within us indicates that God must exist.

Hume

Investigation of Human Understanding

An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding

Experience as the foundation of all knowledge, stressing the limitations and passive role of the human mind in processing that experience.

Section 2 - origins of ideas

exploring the nature of ideas within the mind, focusing on what he describes as the “perceptions of the mind. ”While he does not provide a precise definition, it can be understood to encompass all mental content we are aware of. He categories perceptions into two main types: impressions and ideas

Inward Impressions

direct experiences of sensations and emotions and the memories or ideas we have about those experiences

Concept copy

All ideas, according to Hume, are rooted in antecedent impressions, highlighting a connection between experience and thought

Simple and complex ideas

Basic impressions or ideas that cannot be broken down into smaller components; consist of multiple parts that can be identified and separated.

The 4 process of the imagination

Compounding (Combining), Transposing, Augmenting (Enlarging), Diminishing (Shrinking)

All our ideas or more feeble perceptions are copies of our impressions or more lively ones.

All mental content originates from sensory experiences and internal feelings

God as a complex idea

All complex ideas stem from simpler impressions, which are the building blocks of our thoughts

Blind man and idea of colour etc

The relationship between impressions and ideas centres around the premise that if an individual lacks a corresponding impression, they will also lack the associated idea.

Counter example - missing shades of blue

A thought experiment involving a colour that we can conceive of a shade of blue that we have never encountered in reality prompting reflection on whether this simple idea can exist without a corresponding impression.

The Thought Experiment

Not all simple ideas originate from prior impressions

The Philosophical Application of the claim that there are no ideas without impressions.

whenever we encounter an idea or philosophical proposition that appears meaningless, we should trace it back to the impression from which it originated.

Section 4 - part 1: The distinction between relation of ideas and matter of facts

Emphasising the distinctions between types of propositions and knowledge.

Relations of ideas

An assertion that is known to be true either intuitively or demonstratively.

Matter of facts

Explores the nature of knowledge that is derived from observation and experience, emphasising the distinction between matters of fact and relations of ideas.

Why is it necessary to study the relation of cause and effect

Studying the relationship of cause and effect is essential because it underpins our understanding of reality and informs the beliefs we hold about matters of fact that we have not directly observed.

Cause and effect is not know a priori

Asserts that cause and effect cannot be known a priori, meaning that such knowledge cannot be derived solely through reasoning or intellectual deduction without direct experience.

Example of Adam

Hume’s argument highlights the limitations of human perception when it comes to understanding the underlying causes and effects of objects.

Examples of where people would agree with the claim

Demonstrate how individuals often recognise their limitations in understanding through reason when we accept the idea that we cannot rely solely on reason to fully understand the causes and effects associated with objects.

Example of where people find the claim difficult to accept

Hume presents a thought-provoking analysis of when people struggle to accept the limitations of reasoning in predicting causes and effects

We cannot discover the necessity of the effect a priori

Hume's perspective is rooted in skepticism regarding causality. He argues that we cannot ascertain the necessity of an effect based on solely rational thought

Summary of Humes position so far

Effects and their causes are fundamentally distinct events

Section 4 - part 2: It is not enough to say our reasonings about matters of fact are based on experience

Hume expands on the concept of our reasoning regarding matters of fact, emphasising that simply relying on experience is insufficient.

The problem of induction

Explores the limitations of inductive reasoning, which draws conclusions based on past experiences.

Our belief in cause and effect necessity is not a relations of ideas

Argues that our belief in cause and effect is not based on necessary truths, unlike the relations of ideas established through reasoning.

Reasoning based of matters of facts

Presents a critical perspective on reasoning based on matters of fact, particularly concerning cause and effect.

Maybe the relevant argument had not been uncovered yet

Suggests it is plausible that he simply hasn't discovered the right reasoning to support this belief about cause and effect.

Humes solution

We draw the inference from cause to effect (inductive conclusions) without reasoning or argument, but on the basis of custom and habit.

Deontological Ethics

Posits that the morality of an action is fundamentally rooted in duty, as opposed to the consequences of that action.

Sovereignty of reason

Emphasises the role of reason in determining moral principles

Good will

Centres around the idea that true goodness in actions does not stem from their consequences but from the intrinsic nature of the actions themselves.

Duty vs inclination

The intention to act according to one's duty, in alignment with moral law, is what grants an action its moral worth.

Categorical imperative and maxims

Provides a framework for determining our moral duties and guiding our actions

Imperfect duties

Moral obligations that we are not strictly defined in terms of frequency or manner of execution

Humanity law formulation

Argues that even though it is acceptable to use others to achieve goals it must never undermine their intrinsic value as individuals deserving of respect.

Criticism of Kantian ethics

Challenges the applicability and coherence in real-life scenarios for kantian ethics.

Teleological ethics

Evaluates the moral worth of actions based on their outcomes rather than adherence to rules or duties

Sovereign masters

Primary objective of morality is to enhance utility by maximising good while minimising bad

GHP

Greatest Happiness Principle

3 components of GHP

actions are deemed right if they promote happiness and wrong if they result in the opposite. maximises overall happiness for all individuals affected by it.

Consequentialist Principle

The morality of an action is determined solely by its outcomes

Hedonic principle

Pleasure is inherently valuable and the primary motivator of human behaviour.

Equity Principle

Every individual's happiness hold equal weight in moral considerations

Hedonic calculus

Used to measure the moral worth of actions based on the pleasure and pain they produce

Mill utilitarianism

Expansion of Bentham ideas while addresses criticism of the latter's hedonic calculus and emphasises the importance of distinguishing the quality of pleasures.

Higher and lower pleasures

Higher pleasures arise from intellectual and artistic pursuits unique to humans against Lower Pleasures that are primarily shared by animals.

Competent judges

Individuals who have experienced both types of pleasure and can accurately assess their value.

Rule utilitarianism

Based on the adherence to general rules of conduct believed to promote overall happiness

What is the difference between act and rule utilitarianism

Emphasises that the morality of an action should be determined by the consequences of that specific act against broad guidelines that generally promote utility

Hard and soft rule utilitarianism

Discusses on rule-based ethical decision-making; Hard and Soft Rule Utilitarianism

Consequentialism/Problems

Measuring potential outcomes while acting through utilitarian lens proves challenge in predictions and affects decision making

Hedonism/Problems

While assessing the value in human existence, measuring pleasure and pain proves complex in the doctrine framework

Equity/Problems

Equity is overriden while desires of the majority override the rights and happiness of minority groups.