HZT4U - Unit 1 - Foundational Matters
Inclusive of vocabulary words #1-6
Philosophy
Philosophy - The love of wisdom
Philo- - To love, as in to be joined with and delighted by
-sophy - Wisdom
Philosophy is comprised of both content and method
Content - The deep matters in philosophy, whose questions and laws offer points to be considered
Method - The rational investigation, comprised of arguing and reasoning, that attempts to discern the content of philosophy
Truth
Radical Relativism - The truth of a belief is relative to a person’s belief, should the person sincerely hold it, allowing the truth to change from person to person on a matter of differing beliefs
Supported by people who believe they can think and feel the truth, though their beliefs may not be in accordance with reality
Cultural Relativism - The truth of a belief is relative to what the majority of a culture holds as a belief, allowing the truth to change between cultures, both geographically and historically
Following this stance, the truth at any given moment can be ascertained by a poll that determines the position of the majority
It also denies the possibility of progress, because if no belief can be objectively true throughout space and time, then any form of societal, moral, or scientific progress would simply be replacing one truth with an equally valuable truth
Religions and morals become non-binding matters of preference, given that all lifestyles and beliefs are seen to be equally true, which can lead to a lack of purpose and futility
If there is no objective truth, then knowledge becomes meaningless, as its content can be changed according to one person or culture
While evidence can support and discover a truth, it can also be limited or inconclusive, meaning it does not necessarily confirm a truth
Conformity Theory of Truth - The truth is what conforms to reality, and any beliefs that align with that reality are therefore true
Reality is what is
A true belief entails that the mind joins reality and is in accordance with being
If a belief does not conform to reality, it is false
Logic
Deductive Argumentation - Argumentation that uses premises to demonstrate the truth of conclusions with certainty.
Inductive Argumentation - Argumentation that uses premises to assume a probable or likely truth of the conclusion, though it is not certain
Inductive Generalization - Argumentation that observes the specific premises, and makes a general conclusion or future prediction that is likely true
Abduction - Argumentation that offers the best probable explanation or hypothesis given a set of premises
Often, the best logical explanation is one that is predictable, coherent, simple, and fruitful
Argument - A premise or premises that support the truth of a conclusion
Premise - The claim or assertation that is used to justify, prove, or secure the truth of a conclusion
Conclusion - The thesis that one demonstrates or proves true through premises
Logic assesses the validity of an argument, which can be determined if the truth of the conclusion follows necessarily from the truth of the premises
Valid Argument - An argument where the truth of the conclusion must follow from the premises, where it is impossible to be false, should the truth of the premises be assumed
The conclusion is inescapable
Invalid Argument - An argument where the truth of the conclusion cannot certainly follow from the premises, meaning it can possibly be false, should the truth of the premises be assumed
The soundness of an argument can be established by determining - not just assuming - the truth of the premises
Sound Argument - A valid argument that has true premises, meaning the conclusion is definitively proven true
Unsound Argument - An invalid argument, regardless of the truth of the premises, or a valid argument with false premises, which fail to prove the truth of the conclusion
Aristotelian Syllogism - All Ps are Qs. X is a P. Therefore, X is Q.
Modus Ponens - If P, then Q. P. Therefore, Q.
Modus Tollens - If P, then Q. Not Q. Therefore, not P.
Logical Fallacy - Informal logic, or an err in reasoning, that makes an argument invalid, unsound, or irrelevant
Ad Hominem - To the person; attacking the character of a person or a group in an attempt to negate a belief held by that party
This is often invalid or irrelevant to supporting the truth of the conclusion
Appeal to the Majority - Using a majority’s acceptance of a belief to render it true
This follows a relativistic view, which calls into question the truth of the premise, rendering an argument either unsound or invalid
Begging the Question - Using the conclusion of a belief as a premise to support the same belief
This adds no valid and valuable premises to support the truth of the conclusion beyond itself
Confusing Correlation with Causation - Believing that because X and Y have a correlation, they must be directly related through causation
This ignores any other variables, meaning the truth of the conclusion does not inescapably follow
Appeal to Authority - Using an authoritative figure supporting a belief to show that it is true
This can invalidate an argument because something is not necessarily true just because someone in a position of authority said so
Appeal to Disagreement - Claiming an absence of a truth or the futility of searching for one because there is a disagreement or debate on the matter
This is relativistic in nature, claiming that there cannot be an objective and understandable truth because people cannot agree on it
Appeal to Offense - Taking the offense that one belief may cause as evidence that it cannot be true
This uses an irrelevant premise to try to support the conclusion
Genetic Fallacy - Using a belief’s origin to negate the belief as true due to a lack of evidence
This fails to recognize that having a certain origin does not necessarily cause there to be a lack of evidence, meaning the conclusion can still possibly be true, no matter how unusual its conception was
Straw Man - Creating an argument against an exaggerated, flawed, or weak position that shares similarities with a certain belief, and then concluding that the certain belief must also be false
This is irrelevant because it does not address the actual belief it is arguing against - it instead takes down a caricature that is clearly flawed, which no one likely holds
False Dichotomy - Offering an “either…or” statement that does not truly represent all the real possibilities, thus making it false
The premises of this argument are unsound, because there are not only two possibilities that can occur, though it is presented in that manner
Philosophy and Theology
*Jacques Maritain wrote on theology and philosophy in the historical context of a predominantly Christian society, which has already accepted God and revelation to be true
Philosophy - The use of human reason to understand humanity and reality, and act according to it; the highest human discipline because, as the foundation of thought, it can judge the other human sciences
Natural Theology - What humans can know about God through reason alone; a focus of philosophy
It is based on philosophical human reason
The nature and existence of God can be contemplated using human reason alone, but it cannot discover mysteries and dogmas of faith
(Supernatural) Theology - The use of human reason and revelation from God to understand Him and all things related to Him; the highest discipline without qualification because, as it is derived from God, the highest and most divine power, it should have the greater authority, significance, and truth
Revelation - What God has revealed to humanity, through Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition, and the Magisterium
Should we reason that there be a higher, more powerful God with natural theology, it follows then that any knowledge imparted by God should be higher and more powerful than the knowledge humans can acquire on our own
Humans are often limited in understanding and reason, and aspects of the faith, such as mysteries and dogmas, are beyond our reasoning
Theology judges philosophy because it is a higher discipline, meaning principles of philosophy should conform to the divinely-originated, and thus superior, principles of theology
Theology serves as a guiding force for philosophy
As a negative norm or government
Theology, because it is a higher and more authoritative truth, can reject matters of philosophy that contradict it
If they are in contradiction, then the theology must take precedent
Philosophy is self-supported, as it can achieve its own conclusions of reason through reason alone
It therefore does not need positive government from theology because if reason can prove something to be true, it must be true, so long as it does not contradict the faith
A philosophical impetus
When matters of revelation are accepted, it opens new branches of thought that could not have been accessible to human reason alone
This furthers philosophy and thought as a whole
As a lived reality
Theology imparts virtues, such as humility, patience, and courage, on those who believe
These qualities make a much more apt philosopher who can have the proper state of mind to approach thinking and reality
Philosophy serves as an instrument of theology
It supports and confirms the praembula fidei
Using reason, philosophy can make certain the matters of theology, such as the existence of God and a human soul
It clarifies mysteries of the faith
Philosophy can make sense of theological matters, such as the sacraments and the Holy Trinity
It responds to objections of the faith
Using reason, philosophy can counter things contrary to what theology teaches
Because philosophy exists as a distinct discipline utilizing human reason alone, revelation cannot be used as a premise
Furthermore, the existence of theology does not negate the discipline of philosophy - both are necessary to understand the natures of the universe