Methods of Philosophizing & Theories of Truth

Eastern Philosophy
- Buddhism
- Confucianism
Filipino (Pinoy) Philosophy — culturally valued traits
- Positive, honest, entertaining
- Happy, friendly, forgiving
- Peace-loving, valuing faith & happiness
- Health-oriented, humble, efficient, strong, energetic, and reflective thinkers

Introduce several methods/ways of looking at truth through different theories of truth.
Distinguish each method of philosophizing.
Appreciate the individual uniqueness and application of every method.

“Man has an insatiable desire for truth.”
Knowing the truth is foundational for forming reliable beliefs, making sound choices, and avoiding deception.

Cave dwellers = ordinary people trapped by surface appearances (shadows).
Freed slave = philosopher; exits the cave, sees real objects, grasps higher reality.
Moral challenge:
- Free ourselves from ignorance.
- Exercise critical thinking to attain truth.

“How do we know that what we believe is true?”
Philosophy supplies conceptual tools for filtering information we encounter daily.

Core idea: A proposition is true iff it matches (corresponds to) the facts or reality.
Truth test: Empirical checking / observation.
Example
- Statement: “Pigs have wings.”
- Observation: Actual pigs do not have wings ⇒ statement is false.

A belief is true if it works, is useful, and produces satisfactory/practical consequences.
Meaningfulness of a sentence = believing it “makes a practical difference in your life.”
Example
- Belief: Wearing face mask/face shield reduces COVID-19 transmission.
- Utility: Provides a practical public-health benefit during a pandemic ⇒ belief counted as true (pragmatically).

Truth = coherence with an existing, internally consistent body of beliefs/knowledge.
If a new claim clashes with established, well-founded beliefs, it is probably wrong.
Mathematical examples
- 5+2 = 7 is true because it coheres with 7 = 7 and 1+6 = 7; internal consistency is preserved.
- 9+3+1+8+3+6 = 30 (sum coheres within arithmetic rules).
- \sqrt{400}=20 — mathematical coherence.
Non-mathematical examples
- Christians believe in Jesus Christ (coheres with Christian doctrine).
- Acceptance of the law of gravity across physics – new claims must fit this framework.

“Can there be one interpretation of truth?”
- Slide invites reflection that multiple methods may simultaneously contribute.

To decide whether beliefs are true, assess:
- Correspondence: Does it match facts?
- Coherence: Does it fit the overall system?
- Pragmatic value: Does it work/useful?
Parallels to Plato: Open minds to multiple, possibly complementary paths to truth.

Founder: Edmund Husserl (1859-1938).
Studies phenomena — anything that exists and of which the mind is conscious.
Method aims to describe, understand, interpret meanings of human experience from the first-person point of view.
Rejects reliance on external structures, absolute truths, or natural laws; centers facts on lived experiences.
Everyday context prompt: “How was your experience with distance learning?”
Sample phenomena investigated
- Child labor (“Batang Hamog”) — qualitative insight into children’s lived realities.
- Survivor experiences: natural disasters, cancer, strokes, recovery from COVID-19—used in health sectors to improve care.

Founder: Jean-Paul Sartre; motto: “Existence precedes essence.”
Focus: the problem of human existence & freedom.
Central claims
- Humans are free agents, defining life’s meaning through choices.
- We must make rational decisions in an irrational, absurd world.
- While external circumstances may be fixed, attitude toward them can be freely changed.
Truth criterion: authenticity in exercising personal freedom and choice.

Holds that arriving at a single, absolute truth is impossible.
Truths vary across cultures, places, times; reality is fragmented & uncertain.
There are many individual truths, each valid for the person/group that adopts them.
Illustrated via pluralism in pop culture: fashion styles, diverse music genres (rock, jazz, folk, electronic, classical, stage/screen, world), Hollywood franchises (Star Wars), LGBTQ+ identities, etc.

Truth grounded in reasoning and the systematic construction/evaluation of arguments.
Aims to avoid fallacies—arguments based on faulty reasoning. Some fallacies are deliberate persuasion tools.

Ad Hominem — attacking the person rather than the argument.
- Example: “Of course he believes the government is flawed; he’s a rebel and a communist.”
Appeal to Force — threatening harm to win acceptance.
- Example: “If this peace agreement isn’t signed, we will have to go to war.”
Appeal to Emotion — exploiting pity/sympathy.
- Example: “All these charges are baseless—can’t you see how this is affecting my family?”
Appeal to the Popular (Ad Populum) — claiming truth because many people believe it.
- Example: “Every boy your age has a girlfriend; you should get one too!”
Appeal to Tradition — asserting a claim is true because it’s long-standing.
- Example: “Marriage must remain between a man and a woman; it has always been so in this country.”

Multiple philosophical lenses exist to interrogate truth; each supplies distinct criteria:
- Empirical match (Correspondence)
- Systemic fit (Coherence)
- Practical utility (Pragmatism)
- Subjective first-person meaning (Phenomenology)
- Authentic free choice (Existentialism)
- Cultural/temporal plurality (Postmodernism)
- Logical rigor (Logic)
Effective philosophizing entails integrating these methods to avoid ignorance (Plato’s cave) and foster well-rounded, critically examined beliefs.