Philosophical Methods of Inquiry, Logic, and Conceptual Analysis

Philosophical Methods of Inquiry

Sources of Evidence

• Philosophical claims require evidence, even though philosophy isn't an empirical science.
• Philosophers need reasons for their claims.

History

• The history of philosophy is a significant source of evidence.
• Philosophical thinking has origins worldwide from the beginning of recorded history.
• Historical philosophers, sages, natural philosophers, and religious thinkers offer insights and arguments.
• Example: The Greeks distinguished between generic terms (cat, tree, house) and specific, individual beings.
• Philosophical Question: What's the relationship between general terms and specific things?
• Questions of morality and social organization remain relevant over time.
• Political leaders often reference historical philosophers (e.g., U.S. Founding Fathers, Confucius in China).

Intuition

• Intuition, in a philosophical sense, traces back to Plato and involves insight into the nature of things.
• Rene Descartes' definition: "the conception of a clear and attentive mind, which is so easy and distinct that there can be no room for doubt about what we are understanding."
• Intuition means something definite, unlike the common use as a "gut feeling".
• Example: 2 + 2 = 4 is intuitively true; denying it would require giving up core beliefs about numbers and equality.
• Other examples include "a three-legged stool has three legs" and "the tallest building is taller than any other building."
• Some truths rely on definitions, while others rely on mental operations or commonly accepted knowledge.
• In morality, the proposition that "it is better to be good than to be bad" seems intuitively true.
• Caution is needed when intuitions extend into areas without consensus.
• Distinguishing between certain intuitions and mere feelings is crucial.

Common Sense

• Common sense refers to a basic set of facts or common knowledge.
• Philosophically, it involves specific claims based on direct sense perception.
• Philosophers of common sense argue against skepticism of basic sense perception claims.
• Example: G.E. Moore's proof of the external world by gesturing to his hand and stating, "Here is one hand."
• Knowledge of one's own hands doesn't need further proof.
• Common sense can be questioned, but the common-sense philosopher may deem such interrogation unnecessary or excessive.

Experimental Philosophy

• Experimental philosophy uses empirical methods similar to psychology or cognitive science.
• It tests philosophical terms and concepts in a laboratory setting.
• Example: Testing whether people believe free will is necessary for moral responsibility by posing scenarios to research subjects.
• It aims to confirm that philosophical common sense or intuition aligns with general public opinion.
• Studies require replication and should align with psychological or biological theories.
• Experimental philosophers behave more like scientists and adhere to rigorous standards.

Results from Other Disciplines

• Philosophical claims should consider findings from scientific disciplines.
• Claims about the natural world should align with natural sciences.
• Claims about human nature should align with biology and social sciences.
• Philosophers should welcome evidence from other disciplines to better understand the whole truth.

Summary of Philosophical Evidence Types

• History: Insights from past philosophers.
• Intuition: Insight into the nature of things.
• Common Sense: Claims based on direct sense perception.
• Experimental Philosophy: Testing concepts in a lab.
• Results from Other Disciplines: Evidence from scientific fields.

Logic

• Logic is the science of reasoning.
• It formalizes the process of providing reasons for claims.
• Logic helps assess whether claims are well-founded and consistent.
• Claims are the product of arguments.
• An argument is a series of sentences where premises provide evidence for a conclusion.
• Arguments can be reconstructed to identify premises and conclusions.
• Formal techniques evaluate whether claims are well-supported.
• Poorly supported claims may be true, but supporting them is irrational.
• Arguments can explain phenomena by reasoning backward from observations to evidence.
• Logical reconstruction provides rational explanations for observations.

Coherence

• Logic assesses the consistency of a set of claims or beliefs.
• Beliefs should be internally consistent.
• Coherence: Statements/beliefs can be true simultaneously.
• Contradictory statements/beliefs cannot be true simultaneously.
• Inconsistent beliefs indicate at least one false claim.
• Philosophers must revise beliefs or give up some to maintain consistency.
• Logical consistency does not guarantee truth, but inconsistency indicates falsehood.

Conceptual Analysis

• Conceptual analysis clarifies and understands philosophical statements.
• It involves breaking apart complex ideas into simpler ones.
• It aims for clearer and more workable definitions of concepts.
• Dictionary definitions describe ordinary usage but may not be coherent, accurate, or precise.
• Philosophers determine the meaning of terms and whether it fits within a larger understanding of the world.
• Sentences in natural language can be translated into a formal, symbolic language.
• Sentences can be broken into names/object identifiers and concepts/predicates.
• The role of conceptual analysis is to identify the right predicates and clarify the relationship between them.
• For any sentence, ask: What is being predicated? How is it being predicated?

Descriptions

• Objects can be analyzed using descriptions.
• Bertrand Russell identified definite descriptions to analyze proper names or objects.
• Subject terms can be substituted with descriptive sentences that uniquely identify them.
• Proper names are definite descriptions in disguise.
• Definite descriptions clarify what we are talking about without gestures, context, or direct experience.
• Understanding definite descriptions and predicates reduces ambiguity and vagueness.

Enumeration

• Enumerating component parts helps understand a concept.
• Example: A governmental body consists of its legislature, executive, and judicial branches.
• Claims about the whole can be analyzed as claims about its parts.
• Enumeration can be used to understand abstract concepts.
• Example: Aristotle says wisdom is composed of scientific knowledge plus understanding.

Thought Experiments

• Thought experiments are hypothetical scenarios that clarify the relationship between concepts.
• They isolate features of a concept and place it in relationship with other concepts.
• Philosophers have used them for a long time.
• Example: Plato's ideal city in The Republic to identify the source of justice.
• Example: Aristotle's claim that nature abhors a vacuum by imagining a void.
• Thought experiments test moral theories by applying them to hypothetical cases.
• They can support or undermine moral theories.

Summary of Conceptual Analysis Methods

• Predicates: Descriptive terms used to clarify statements.
• Descriptions: Definite descriptions analyze names and object terms.
• Enumeration: Identifying the component parts of a concept.
• Thought Experiments: Hypothetical scenarios that test and compare concepts.

Tradeoffs

• Philosophers aim to understand how things connect broadly.
• No single philosophical picture is obviously compelling.
• There will be competing pictures, each with strong reasons.
• We must evaluate each picture and understand the tradeoffs they impose.
• Consider the practical and logical implications of beliefs.

Biting the Bullet

• "Biting the bullet" means accepting negative consequences of a view because it is attractive for other reasons.
• Example: A philosopher committed to determinism might accept that free will is an illusion.
• Example: A philosopher focused on total quantity of effects of an action might accept harming an individual.
• Be honest about the logical and moral consequences of views.

Reflective Equilibrium

• Reflective equilibrium assesses the logical and moral consequences of our thinking.
• It uses judgments about particular cases to revise principles, rules, or theories about general cases.
• Theoretical and practical beliefs must cohere utilizing this method.
• It involves revising theoretical stances based on practical judgments.
• Reflective equilibrium justifies beliefs by assessing their logical consistency, incorporating practical judgments.
• Students should be aware of both theoretical commitments and practical concerns.