Matthew McGee
Epistemology
Final Paper
Q1 Goodman 's “grue” example and Hempel’s Raven Paradox are very similar. The Raven Paradox posits that for any given object x, when we assert that it is neither black, nor a raven, we are confirming the hypothesis that “all non-black things are non-ravens” (pg, 70). From this we can also make the logically equivalent statement that “all ravens are black.” This is an unexpected conclusion according to Goodman. Furthermore, our statement about the given object x logically entails that anything that is not black is not a raven, and anything that is not a raven is not black. A logical fallacy that would seem to follow from this statement is that "all black objects are ravens. Obviously we can reject …show more content…
In other words, intuition driven romanticism relies in part on intuitive human feelings as evidence that produces explicit or implicit normative claims. The authors see intuition driven romanticism as one version in a tradition of romanticism in epistemology, which they hope to …show more content…
Their consensus is that IDR fails the “normative test.” As they point out, different groups of people, i.e. different cultures, or even similar cultures across long periods of human history, will invariably possess differing intuitions. Therefore, when these intuitive inputs are filtered through an IDR “black box” they will produce valuative and regulative norms, some of which may be might even be antithetical to our own. All of which is another way of stating that human beings are different from one another, across the planet and across time, and that if they base their norms and values on intuition or similar romantic based foundations, they may very well arrive at a system of beliefs not just different from our own, but one that we might find abhorrent. The authors thus conclude that intuition driven romanticism is not a sound basis for empirical
Epistemology
Final Paper
Q1 Goodman 's “grue” example and Hempel’s Raven Paradox are very similar. The Raven Paradox posits that for any given object x, when we assert that it is neither black, nor a raven, we are confirming the hypothesis that “all non-black things are non-ravens” (pg, 70). From this we can also make the logically equivalent statement that “all ravens are black.” This is an unexpected conclusion according to Goodman. Furthermore, our statement about the given object x logically entails that anything that is not black is not a raven, and anything that is not a raven is not black. A logical fallacy that would seem to follow from this statement is that "all black objects are ravens. Obviously we can reject …show more content…
In other words, intuition driven romanticism relies in part on intuitive human feelings as evidence that produces explicit or implicit normative claims. The authors see intuition driven romanticism as one version in a tradition of romanticism in epistemology, which they hope to …show more content…
Their consensus is that IDR fails the “normative test.” As they point out, different groups of people, i.e. different cultures, or even similar cultures across long periods of human history, will invariably possess differing intuitions. Therefore, when these intuitive inputs are filtered through an IDR “black box” they will produce valuative and regulative norms, some of which may be might even be antithetical to our own. All of which is another way of stating that human beings are different from one another, across the planet and across time, and that if they base their norms and values on intuition or similar romantic based foundations, they may very well arrive at a system of beliefs not just different from our own, but one that we might find abhorrent. The authors thus conclude that intuition driven romanticism is not a sound basis for empirical