Philosophy 1

Front 1

valid

Back 1

an argument is this if and only if it is not possible for the premises to be true and conclusion to be false. does not need to conform to reality

Front 2

sound

Back 2

an argument is this only if it is valid and its premises are true. conforms to reality

Front 3

deductive valid arguments

Back 3

does not indicate a conditional statement. causal relationship

Front 4

fallacies

Back 4

invalid argument..conditional statement inferring the denial of the consequent

Front 5

circularity

Back 5

fallacy explicitly or implicitly asserting in the premise of the argument what is asserted in the conclusion of that argument. avoids the question

Front 6

attacking the straw man

Back 6

fallacy misrepresenting an opponents position or argument, usually for the purpose of making it easier to attack

Front 7

hasty generalization

Back 7

fallacy drawing a conclusion from an example that is not representative enough. insufficient sample or false stereotype

Front 8

sweeping generalization

Back 8

fallacy of accident. applying a generalization that is true in most cases to instances that are exceptions.

Front 9

post hoc fallacy

Back 9

a fallacy of false cause. assuming that a particular event B is cause by another event because A follows B in time

Front 10

domino

Back 10

also slippery slope fallacy. assuming an event is the first in a series of steps that will inevitably lead to an undesirable consequence.

Front 11

ad hominem

Back 11

fallacy attacking the opponent in a personal or abusive way as a means of discrediting their argument

Front 12

William James says we can only believe with lack of evidence if it is

Back 12

living, forced, momentous

Front 13

William James says we can only believe with lack of evidence if it is living

Back 13

not lacking credibility

Front 14

William James says we can only believe with lack of evidence if it is forced

Back 14

withholding judgement til sufficient evidence available is inappropriate..we lose something in waiting

Front 15

William James says we can only believe with lack of evidence if it is momentous

Back 15

decision has an impact on one's life..not a trivial issue

Front 16

William James characteristics of mystical experiences

Back 16

ineffability, noetic, transient, passivity

Front 17

William James characteristics of mystical experiences

ineffability

Back 17

can't be described in words

Front 18

William James characteristics of mystical experiences

transient

Back 18

cannot be sustained for long

Front 19

William James characteristics of mystical experiences

noetic

Back 19

knowledge is obtained

Front 20

William James characteristics of mystical experiences

passivity

Back 20

the mystic feels controlled by a superior power

Front 21

Pascale's Wager

Back 21

what are you giving up not believing. it is wise to be on the existence of god, those who doubt are irrational.

Front 22

Thomas Aquinas 5 ways

Back 22

motion and change, causation, contingency, gradations of perfection, argument from design

Front 23

Thomas Aquinas 5 ways

motion and change

Back 23

since everything is in motion and changing it must be put into motion by something else, the unmoved mover, unchanging source of all change

Front 24

Thomas Aquinas 5 ways

causation

Back 24

nothing is the efficient cause of its own existence because it would have to be prior to itself which is impossible

Front 25

Thomas Aquinas 5 ways

contingency

Back 25

this being does not depend on another cause for its necessity is god, being is independent

Front 26

Thomas Aquinas 5 ways

gradations of perfection

Back 26

our high standards of perfection prove the existence of god because he is the source of perfection

Front 27

Thomas Aquinas 5 ways

argument for design

Back 27

universe is orderly and purposeful

Front 28

William James and Pragmatism

Back 28

how does god benefit you in this life? the philosophy of meaning and truth. relationship between thought and action.

Front 29

aesthetics

Back 29

the study of the feeling and judgements that arise from appreciation of art and nature

Front 30

epistemology

Back 30

study of truth and knowledge

Front 31

divisions of epistemology

Back 31

rationalism and empiricism

Front 32

epistemology division of empiricism

Back 32

belief that knowledge is linked to experience. statements that can be verified through the use of senses (aristotle)

Front 33

epistemology division of rationalism

Back 33

belief that unaided reason can acquire at least some knowledge of the nature of what exists dependent of sense experience (Plato)

Front 34

ethics

Back 34

study of practical reason and morality

Front 35

logic

Back 35

study of the structure of principles of reasoning includes the study of arguments validity and soundness

Front 36

metaphysics

Back 36

study of the nature of ultimate reality, reality as a whole

Front 37

social and political philosophy

Back 37

the study of how society is or ought to be organized, role of the government

Front 38

Logics two major arguments

Back 38

deductive and inductive arguments

Front 39

deductive argument

Back 39

an argument from in which the conclusion follows necessarily from the premises. if the arguments structure is valid it is logically necessary that if the premises are all true, so is the conclusion

Front 40

inductive argument

Back 40

the premises support the conclusion but the conclusion does not necessarily follow from the premises. it is likely, but not logically necessary that if the premises are all true so is the conclusion.

Front 41

modus ponens

Back 41

affirming the antecedent

Front 42

modus tonens

Back 42

denying the consequent

Front 43

informal logic

Back 43

practical logic, the use of logic to analyze arguments as they occur in everyday conversations

Front 44

informal fallacy

Back 44

a fallacy that is not covered by some system of deductive or inductive logic. misuses of argument in relation to the context of reasoning the arguer is using.

Front 45

poisoning the well

Back 45

fallacy rejecting a criticism presented by another person because of his or her personal circumstances or improper motives. a form of ad hominem. aims to discredit opponent before they speak.

Front 46

is ought fallacy

Back 46

fallacy assuming because something is now the practice that it is how its ought to be

Front 47

one sided fallacy

Back 47

fallacy ignores or omits any reference to important evidence unfavorable to one's position. no evidence against it

Front 48

red herring

Back 48

fallacy also called beside the point, hiding the weakness of a position by drawing attention away from the real issue to a side issue

Front 49

equivocation

Back 49

fallacy illegitimate switching of the meaning of an ambiguous term during reasoning

Front 50

fallacy of division

Back 50

fallacy assuming what is true of a whole is therefor true of its parts

Front 51

fallacy of composition

Back 51

fallacy assuming what is true of the parts is therefore true of the whole

Front 52

appeal to ignorance

Back 52

fallacy since it is not known to be true it must be false

Front 53

appeal to irrelevant authority

Back 53

fallacy attempting to support a claim by appealing to the judgement of one who is not an authority in the field or an unidentified authority or is biased

Front 54

appeal to tradition

Back 54

fallacy persuading others of a point of view by appealing to their feelings of reverence or respect for a tradition instead of evidence

Front 55

appeal to common opinion

Back 55

fallacy jumping on the bandwagon, b/c its accepted by most it should be accepted

Front 56

agnosticism

Back 56

gods existence can't be proven or disproven, we shouldn't make judgements about it

Front 57

atheism

Back 57

there is no god or gods

Front 58

fideism

Back 58

reason and faith are hostile to each other and faith is superior at arriving at knowledge of things divine

Front 59

natural theology

Back 59

reasoning without appealing to revelation

Front 60

negative theology

Back 60

we can more accurately say what god is not than what god is

Front 61

pantheism

Back 61

god and the universe are one, the one and only reality

Front 62

theodicy

Back 62

defending the goodness and omnipotence of god in the face of suffering and evil

Front 63

theology

Back 63

study based on belief of god or gods or in the rational analysis of a religious faith

Front 64

teleological argument

Back 64

argument from design, the universe is too orderly, complex and purposeful to have come into existence by accident. must be the product of an intelligent creator

Front 65

cosmological argument

Back 65

everything depends on something else for its existence. dependent beings must depend on a non-dependent existing being such as god

Front 66

ontological argument

Back 66

god is something in which nothing greater can be conceived. god exists in understanding. people know what god is whether they believe in it or not. god exists in understanding and reality

Front 67

relativism

Back 67

truth is relative to the judging subject

Front 68

allegory of the cave

Back 68

story told by Socrates in Plato's Republic dialogue. Plato uses it to illustrate the difference between knowledge and illusion, reality and appearance. The one who escapes the cave represents the upward journey of the soul into the region of intelligence (the forms) i.e. what is truly real

Front 69

protagoras and his 2 beliefs

Back 69

first and most famous of the sophists said man is the measure of all things

1. each individual uses his/her own standard to interpret

2. society as a whole is the measure of all things

Front 70

plato

Back 70

epistemology and metaphysics. student of socrates. believed in existence of unchanging forms or universals that exist on a metaphysical plane inaccessible to the senses. they are not spacial temporal but our reason can access them. they are the ultimate source of knowledge.

Front 71

sophists

Back 71

influential group of traveling educators who taught oration for a fee. they believed the truth is relative.

Front 72

socrates and sophists

Back 72

followers of socrates are often sophists, socrates believes in objective truth which sophists deny

Front 73

skepticism

Back 73

claim true knowledge is unattainable

Front 74

meno dialogue

Back 74

all knowledge is recollection. it is a result of the soul's previous acquaintance with the forms, prior to ones embodied life

Front 75

induction

Back 75

reasoning that takes emperical premises to empirical conclusions, conclusions related to the premises.

Front 76

ampliative argument

Back 76

arguments whose conclusions go beyond their premise amplifying scope of beliefs

Front 77

problem of induction

Back 77

how can we move from impiricle observation to generalization that include unobserved cases uniformity of nature. instances of which we have had no experience resemble those of which we have had experience

Front 78

uniformity of nature

Back 78

future will resemble the past, similar effects will occur in similar situations

Front 79

Hume's Fork relations of ideas

Back 79

principles of math and logic use reason reference experience

Front 80

Humes fork matters of fact and real existance

Back 80

confirmed by appeal to experience. permits logical contradictions

Front 81

Karl Popper and problem of induction

Back 81

Problem of induction. hypotheses must face the tribunal of experience which can also falsify but not confirm them. hypotheses that survive can be accepted provisionally but never assigned a probability.

well tested theorires may be used for practical purposes but scientists shouldnt believe these theories are true

Front 82

renee descartes

Back 82

i think therefor i am, an archimedean point he arrived at through his method of doubting all his beliefs, foundation of rationalistic certainty

Front 83

archimedean point

Back 83

an external vantage point from which an objective true perspective is obtainable. named after astronomer and physicist archimedes

Front 84

Descartes thinking substance

Back 84

the soul. indivisible. not accessible to senses. spiritual reality. the self. cogito, thinking substance. your soul is the real you

Front 85

Descartes physical substance

Back 85

the human body belongs to the category of divisible matter that takes up space and is governed by mechanical laws. god is a non created thinking substance

Front 86

descartes mental functions 1. intellect

Back 86

thought. independent mental activity. this faculty operates independently of the brain of body. the truth of math and metaphysics are grasped without the aid of the senses or imagination. the intellect can think of the things without intuiting them as present (100 sided polygon)

Front 87

descartes mental functions 2. imagination

Back 87

intuiting a thing as present to the mind. this faculty seems to recquire the body (though descartes goes through the process of doubting the body exists) imagination and sense perception depend on the body for their operation. mind body union is recquired. (rationalism)

Front 88

behavorism

Back 88

behavior is the proper object of pfychological study. the mental aspects of a person can be analyzed in exclusively behavioral terms which in turn can be reduced to physical laws that govern matter. Gilbert Ryle rejected Descartes dualism which he called the myth of the ghost in the machine was a behaviorist. behaviorsm is a reductionist doctrine that does not account for the fact that behaviors result from a network of beliefs and desires.

Front 89

physicalism

Back 89

or materialism. view that the world is nothing more than the physical world. whatever exists is either matter or entirely dependent on matter for its existance. critics think there is a vagueness of whats considered matter existance/occuring vs being in reality.

Front 90

reductionism

Back 90

doctrine that explains by replacing complex statements with simpler ones. the new. that mental statements are made true out of facts about behavior (behaviorism is reductionist)

Front 91

identity theory of mind

Back 91

mental events are identicle with physical events. being in a certain state of conciousness is identical with being in a corresponding neurophysical state.

Front 92

functionalism

Back 92

theory to behavior that argues how we define mental states by what typically causes them, what effect they have on mental states, what effects they have on behavior

Front 93

Hilary Putnam

Back 93

mind is analogous to computer software.critics say complex entities could have the same functions.. this theory attributes to mind without actually having mental states.

Front 94

Strong AI artificial intelligence theory

Back 94

the need that an appropriately programed computer literally has mental states. Searle used his chinese room example to argue the version of functionalism represented by strong AI must be false having the right function at least when they are specified only by inputs and outputs is not sufficient for having mental states

Front 95

the chinese room argument

Back 95

The Chinese room argument is a thought experiment of John Searle (1980a) and associated (1984) derivation. It is one of the best known and widely credited counters to claims of artificial intelligence (AI)---that is, to claims that computers do or at least can (someday might) think.

Front 96

qualia

Back 96

sensory qualities known by introspection. qualties that characterize what its like to have a paricular phenomally concious mental state that is associated with an experience. presents difficulties for science such as functionalism and physicalism.