Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
55 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
______ was a member of the circle around Socrates |
Plato |
|
|
What are the 3 categories of Philosophy? |
Metaphysics- the branch of philosophy that deals with the first principles of things, including abstract concepts aka. beyond physics
Epistemology- the theory of knowledge, especially with regard to its methods, validity, and scope. -the logic of knowledge -questions how we know something is true Value Theory- ethics: the study of how humans should live with each other (the branch of philosophy that studies and evaluates human conduct) |
|
|
______ not ______ |
Arguments not opinions |
|
|
what is philosophy? |
the love of wisdom |
|
|
who says "I know that I know nothing"? |
Socrates |
|
|
What is philosophy now? Saul Kripke |
"The logical analysis of language" - people can't accurately describe what they are doing |
|
|
What is philosophy now? Giles Deleuze and Felix Guattari |
Philosophy is the creation of concepts |
|
|
What is philosophy now? Daniel Dennets |
Prevents science from overstepping its bounds. Keeps science honest with their claims The big bang is a theory, not a fact |
|
|
What is philosophy now? Alan Badiou |
"Philosophy is the compossibility of truths" tries to make sense of science and art together |
|
|
What questions did Timon of Philus ask? |
1.What are the things i experience?
We can ask great questions yet never get any questions. 2.What is my relation to them? How should i relate to the world 3.How should I respond to them? Agoge (Training), not method |
|
|
Renaissance |
-The rediscovery of greek philosophy in europe - Desderius Eramus (1466-1536)- was a Dutch Renaissance Humanist, Catholic Priest, social critic, teacher, and theologian. Michael de Montaigne (1533-1592)Created essaysTurned skepticism ethics into how we see the world Pierre Gassendi (1592-1655)Space was a vacuum That the world wasn’t just filled with objects, but forces too. Have never known anything about the world, therefore looks at the world. |
|
|
Rationalism |
Reason as the justification of knowledge |
|
|
Empiricism |
The senses as justification for knowledge |
|
|
A Priori |
Known in advance of experience |
|
|
A Posteriori |
Know after an experience |
|
|
Who are the empiricists |
Thomas Hobbes John Locke George Burkeley |
|
|
Thomas Hobbes |
(1588-1679) Perception, imagination, understanding all comes from sensations Everything comes from sensations |
|
|
John Locke |
(1632-1704) INVENTED THE THEORY THAT WE START OFF WITH A TABULA RASA (BLANK STATE). WE KNOW ABSOLUTELY NOTHING THEN AS WE GROW WE LEARN |
|
|
George Burkeley |
(1685-1753) Immaterialism/subjective idealism Things must be perceived at all times in order to exist. |
|
|
Humes and ___________ had the first public "flamewar" |
Jean-Jaques Rousseau |
|
|
A _______ is a violation of the laws of nature |
Miracle |
|
|
Humes Skepticism |
Believes that no testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle UNLESS, the miracle itself i more probable then the testimony |
|
|
Humes Fork |
Relation of ideas vs. matter of facts idea to a fact NOT fact to an idea In order to know things about the world, we need to experience them Relations of ideas are true or false, even it there is no world to gauge them People dont have to have the idea, it still exists “There are two pens” this is only true in our worldIf the world blew up, we wouldn't know how many pens there are But even then we still know that 1+1=2 Matters of fact are only true when they relate directly to what we sense/see We can make deductions about them, but only with terms derived from sensation |
|
|
Relations of ideas |
Truth is derived from definitions of concepts Everything is known purely by reason Logical reasoning described how ideas relate, but does not discuss the world Two ideas that are brought together by their relations |
|
|
Matters of fact |
truth is derived from our senses statements about the world-what is in it and how we experience it describes the world as we are experiencing it |
|
|
Math According to humes |
the language of ideas |
|
|
Causality According to humes |
(cause and effect) does not meet humes fork it is just cause, no effect We can only know what has happened and what is happening (M of F) Causality assumes a relation between what happened that we cannot observe Our relations of ideas (cause and effect) can never determine M of F, therefore causality is neither Custom/habit, not reason, guides our expectations. We expect causality, but we cannot know it with certainty We can expect something, but we cannot know something Cause and effect never reach knowledge |
|
|
Common sense and habit According to humes |
doesnt make sense to humes because it isnt a law of nature |
|
|
Natural science According to humes |
Gravity isnt a fact, just an idea |
|
|
Testimony |
This is necessary to establish any occult or paranormal occurrence- either someone else experiences it, OR you need them to verify your experience
It's just one person's opinion, in order for it to be a fact, other people have to believe it… other people's testimony has to live up with yours No testimony can establish a miracle, we need to have an explanation that would make less sense then the miracle in order for hume’s to believe it. |
|
|
Miracle |
1.“No miracle has ever had so much support as to be beyond all suspicion” (174)
What would this testimony require? The number of people must match the craziness of miracles Integrity (truth) Reliability Has a good reputation for telling the truth 2.” The objects, of which we have no experience, resemble those, of which we have none.” (174) Evaluation relies on common sense Miracles rely on surprise and wonder Heuristic (practical) not law (formal) The same world we have today will be the same we will always have - contradicts causality 3. “Facts are industrious in propagating the imposture; while the wise and learned are contented, in general, to deride its absurdity, without informing themselves of the particular facts, by which it may be distinctly refuted” (176) We should discount miracles because intelligent people discount miracles “It is strange… That such prodigious events never happen in our days. But nothing strange, I hope, that men should lie in all ages” (176) More people had lied in the past therefore more “miracles” had happened in the past 4. Miracles are contradicted by other miracles The status of all witness of miracles are the same yet, they attest to a different miracle. All miracles just have testimonies as “evidence” You should instead believe nothing |
|
|
A ________ can neer be proved by testimony |
Miracle |
|
|
Rene Descartes Purpose
|
“To arrive at a certain and evident knowledge of the truth” (8)
Knowing nothing or knowing everything. |
|
|
Rene Descartes Meditations
|
exercies , not formal philosophy
Not an encyclopaedia of false beliefs but seeks the foundation for all true belief What is true and what is false He wants people to be open to new ideas |
|
|
What can we doubt?
|
|
|
|
First meditation
|
The main concern is with the certainty of knowledge
We cannot know the actual world, but we still must act in ti To find clear and distinct ideas that that cannot be doubted, we need cartesian doubt (everything has to be questioned in order find things that are certain) Presume a demon who always deceives everyone about everything |
|
|
Second meditation
|
“I am hurled into such confusion that i am unable to set my feet on the bottom or swim to the surface”“Therefore, i assume that everything i see is false. (46)“Perhaps there is nothing certain” (46)He just wants something to be true
|
|
|
Cogito “I think, therefore I am”
|
“Let him trick me as much as he can, he will never succeed in making me doubt nothing, as long as i a aware that i am something.” (47)
He can never trick that you are having these false thoughts, he has to be able to trick something “The statement i am , i exist is necessarily true everything i say it or conceive of it in my mind”(47) Thinking is the root of everything |
|
|
I am, i exist What is the i?
|
Aristotle- rational animal
Body Soul, the body’s actions I only know that i am and i think: if i stop thinking i might very well not be What can be known of “i” that cannot be doubted A THINKING THING |
|
|
A thinking thing
|
A thing that doubts, understands affirms, denies, will, imagines and perceives
These faculties are all implied in my thinking “It still appears that i cannot prevent myself from thinking that corporeal things, whose images are formed by thought and which the senses themselves investigate, are much more distinctly known than that an obscure part of me, the i “( 49) |
|
|
Beeswax
|
Melted wax appears different but it is still the same wax
The senses changes (it changed state/form) but “the wax stays the same” The attributes i ascribe to the wax in perception do not belong to the wax, but my perception of it. What was really important hasn't changed (the extension, flexibility and changeability I have knowledge of the wax that is not based in my imagination- I perceive it, instead, with my mind My mental inspection (thinking about it) could be imperfect and confused (as it was with sense perception) or clear and distinct (mental) |
|
|
Clear and distinct ideas
|
“What i thought i was seeing with my eyes I understand only with my faculty of judgement, which is my mind”(51)
This revealed only in judgement: the rational clarification of sensory information, (ex. Color Blind people see different colours) Clarity:we cannot but notice this idea, it is clear out of other sensations (pain) Distinctness: cannot confuse this idea with another (ex. The #4) Something that can't be confused with something else |
|
|
Knowledge
|
From all doubtable perceptions it is still clear that i exist, even if i am tricked on the level of my senses
Those sense perceptions closer to my mental inspection are known with greater certainty:the mid, not the body, is the true source of knowledge If the bodily senses are the basis of skepticism then the mind is the path towards true + certain knowledge (clear + distinct - cant tell through senses, only mind) It is by analogy to the cogito that i can know anything else that is clear and distinct |
|
|
If something is ____ + ________, it cant be tricked |
clear. distinct |
|
|
Cogito and Skepticism
|
Descartes begins his response to skepticism with the Cogito
It cannot be known by science or emirical evidence but is ultimately presumed by all of these to mental inspection of my mind The scientific response to skepticism is to assert probability and sommon sense about the world The philosophical response to skepticism is to establish the truth by logic and argument which can then interpret the world through rigorous science |
|
|
Contemporary philosophy
|
There are many different dichotomies that divide philosophy into perspectives:
Empiricism and rationalism Phenomenology and structurally Idealism and materialism Logic and ordinary language Activism and quietism |
|
|
Peter Van Inwagen
|
1942-
Does not believe in free will (incompatabilism) nor that objects exist (immaterialism) Nothing exists, just atoms Everything is just composed of atoms, it isnt its own object |
|
|
Peter Van Inwagen asks one questions
|
Can analytical philosophy be other than naturalistic?
He uses himself as an ex: he is an analytic philosopher and a Christian, so doesn't he answer his own question Not a question of religion. Could believe in telepathy |
|
|
What is analytical philosophy?
|
Logical positivism: only statements verified through empiricism are meaningful
Abandoned by its founders Neither “verificationism” nor “falsification” are satisfactory Analysis of concepts: philosophers clarify language and concepts used in other disciplines |
|
|
Naturalism
|
the only things that exists are things in nature Natura - birth + growth
Physis - what shows itself Naturalism limits what is to the physical world N is physicalism What exists are things that can be described by physics and the natural sciences |
|
|
David Chalmers
|
“Can analytic philosophy adhere to panpsychism?”
Consciousness is the basic element of the world- cant doubt it Zombies -lack of consciousness Hard probability of consciousness He is a naturalist and consciousness |
|
|
Van inwagen
|
“Can AP be other that naturalist?”
Supernatural analytic philosophy AP can be naturalist and for most people it is, but it does not have to be Anatural not non-natural Most of my philosophical work is simply irrelevant to naturalism Even his religious work is philosophical: the logical coherence of the christian trinity is still philosophy What part of analytic philosophy rejects ghosts, instead of demanding their clarity and engages with natural science? Truck driver likes ballet, not related |
|
|
Jean-Francois Lyotard
|
1924-1998
“I define postmodernism as incredulity towards metanarratives” (XXIV) Science is hostile towards narratives while postmodernism is skeptical of metanarratives Scientific inquiry concerns itself exclusively with the truth. It critiques narrative as “fables, myths etc. ”Postmodernism is concerned with how metanarratives are narratives that seek legitimacy in other narratives Metanarrative - grand narratives |
|
|
Narratives
|
Learning and knowledge
Include why theyre are legitimate Not just denotative Different modes of languages Someone speaking, audience, whatever is being said Certain passing presents info linearly No narrative has absolute authority or legitimacy |
|
|
What are weird things?
|
A claim that is unaccepted by most people in that particular field of studyA claim that is either logically impossible or highly unlikelyA claim for which the evidence is largely anecdotal (made up)
|
