philosophy 1000

What is an argument?

An argument is a set of statements or propositions, with one or more premises intended to support a conclusion. It aims to persuade or provide reasons for accepting a particular viewpoint.

deductive vs inductive argument

deductive arguments are general information that prove the conclusion while inductive arguments are based off of observations and have a probability to them and if they are correct then the conclusion is correct

When is a deductive argument valid?

A deductive argument is valid when, if the premises are true, the conclusion must also be true. Validity does not concern the actual truth of the premises, only the logical structure of the argument.

what does it mean when an argument is sound?

It is both valid and all premises are true

What are logical necessities and logical contradictions?

Logical necessities are statements that must be true in every possible scenario, while logical contradictions are statements that cannot be true in any scenario.

How is an inductive argument evaluated?

An inductive argument is evaluated based on the strength of its premises and how well they support the conclusion, determining whether the conclusion is likely to be true.

Can a Petitio Principii be a valid argument?

no because you assume the truth of what you seek to prove. (circular reasoning)

“ghost are real because people tell stories about seeing ghost”

Argumentum ad ignorantum?

Argument from ignorance

when one argues that it is false because you cannot prove its true and vice versa

(god)

Post hoc ergo propter hoc

After the thing, therefore, because of the thing

I ate a burrito, then I got sick, must be because of the burrito

Argumentum ad miseracordium.

argument from misery

appeal to pitty

my children will starve if you fire me

disjunctive syllogism

p or q

not p

therefore q

valid

modus ponens method of affirming

if p then q

p

therefore q

valid

modus tollens method if denying

if p then q

not q

there fore, not p

invalid

hypothetical syllogism

if c then d

if d then z

therefore if c then z

valid

Constructive Dilemma

1. If P, then Q.

2. If R, then S.

3. Either P or R.

4. Therefore, either Q or S.

Affirming the consequent

• If P, then Q (If P happens, then Q will happen).

• Q is true (Q happens).

• Therefore, P must be true (P happens).

Denying the antecedent

logical necessity vs logical contradiction

Distinguish between foundationalism, reliabilism and coherentism. Which do

you think is the best epistemological theory and why

foundationalism - common knowledge

Reliabilism - true because you have your senses to back it up

coherentism -your beliefs must support each other in order to be true (circular)

What is the JTB theory of knowledge? What are the strengths and

weaknesses of it?

The Justified True Belief (JTB) theory posits that knowledge consists of three components: belief, truth, and justification. Its strengths include clarity and intuitive appeal, while weaknesses involve challenges such as Gettier problems, which demonstrate that justified true beliefs may not always constitute knowledge.

Why does Descartes decide to give up every belief he can find a reason to

doubt?

He seeks to establish a foundation for certain knowledge by doubting all beliefs that could potentially be false.

At the end of Meditation 2, what sort of thing does Descartes claim he is?

A thinking thing

What is the source of the beliefs Descartes has, in the past, accepted as most

true’?

If our sense deceive us then how do we know we are real? what is something that must be true? I think therefore I exist

Does Descartes think that he can doubt the truths of math? Why? What about

his own existence?

A demon could deceive us about math but inorder for a demon to decieve us about our existentence we must be real

What does Descartes’ discussion of the wax aim to show?

We know our gum doesn’t swap because we understand how gum works

10. Why does Descartes need to argue for the existence of God?

because if we had a god then we cannot be deceived therefore his knowledge is reliable

What rule does Descartes accept as his criterion of truth?

clear- no confusion

distinct- seperate from other ideas

What is the Cartesian Circle? Explain.

god is real so no Demon can deceive me

my thoughts of god are clear and distinct

therefore god must be real

Explain Descartes’ Cogito argument. Is it successful?

If you can think then you must exist

what is I?

How did Descartes think the mind and body interact?

through the pineal gland

Do you agree with Descartes? Why?

to an extent

Can you know that you aren’t dreaming?

yes

Does it matter if you can’t know for certain whether you are dreaming?

What do you do?

no

In what way does the shipowner’s belief violate our duty to inquire,

according to Clifford?

believing without proper evidence is not just an intellectual failure, but an ethical one, especially when those beliefs have significant consequences for others.

Does the truth or falsity of the shipowner’s belief bear on whether or not

he violated his duty according to Clifford? Why or why not?

it does not matter if its true or false because it was his moral responsibility to have proper evidence

Why does Clifford believe that it is a vice to hold beliefs on insufficient

evidence?

because our beliefs shape our actions and with insufficient evidence you can harm others

By what three criteria should we judge the proffered beliefs of others,

according to Clifford? Briefly explain each criteria.

• Evidence: Is the belief supported by sufficient and reliable evidence?

• Consequences: What are the potential consequences of holding or spreading this belief, both for the individual and for society?

• Duty to Inquire: Did the person holding the belief make an effort to properly investigate and verify it?

What is a genuine option, according to James? Explain how a genuine option relates to other kinds of options (living/dead, forced/avoidable, momentous/trivial).

an option where choosing to believe or not believe has important consequences and is live, forced, and momentous.

living/dead- either option or only one seems probable to you

forced - you have to choose (not choosing is also an option)

momentous- critcal to ones life

James holds that we have two sources of belief. What are they? On what grounds do they each hold beliefs?

• Reason holds beliefs based on evidence and logical reasoning. It seeks truth and forms beliefs that are supported by data and facts.

• Passion holds beliefs based on personal desires, emotional needs, or existential motives. It seeks meaning and comfort in uncertain or complex situations, often choosing belief in the face of ambiguity. (when evidence lacks)

What are the two competing priorities concerning truth and error that we may hold, according to James? Which priority does he favour for scientific questions?

• Priority of Avoiding Error: James favors this approach for scientific questions, emphasizing caution, evidence, and skepticism.

• Priority of Seeking Truth: James allows for this approach in other domains (like religion or personal beliefs), where the search for meaning may involve risking error in the pursuit of deeper understanding or personal commitment.

James thinks some important questions are forced questions. What two major questions are forced? Why are they forced questions?

god - we can believe or not

faith and morality- we can adopt or not

changes how we live our life

Why does James think it is acceptable to believe the religious hypothesis, if it is a live option for us?

it is a genuine option and the will to believe

Do you think that James has presented a reasonable defence of faith- based beliefs? Why or why not? Is there anything interesting about using reason to defend faith in this way? If so, what is it? If not, why not?

there should be evidence as it could lead to believing harmful beliefs

Cartesian Dualism

The mind and the body

Epiphenomenalism

the physical events effect the mental state but not vice versa

Idealism

reality is fundamentally mental or dependent on the mind. It asserts that the material world either does not exist independently of the mind, or is shaped by mental processes

Physicalism

The mind is the brain (physical)

What are some of the strengths and weaknesses of the above theories?

• Idealism offers a robust account of the centrality of consciousness but struggles with objectivity and scientific integration.

• Physicalism is scientifically grounded but faces challenges explaining subjective experiences and consciousness.

• Dualism intuitively separates the mind and body but struggles with the interaction problem and empirical evidence.

• Epiphenomenalism aligns with physicalism but fails to explain mental causation or the role of the mind in influencing behavior.

Which is the correct theory regarding mind and body? Why?

What is Ockham’s razor?

It helps guide reasoning by suggesting that the most straightforward explanation is often the best. (simple)

How might one use Ockham’s razor in the mind/body debate?

Physicalism is the simplest theory, as it explains the mind entirely in terms of the physical brain, without introducing separate substances or entities.