Philosophy Test 1

Total Flash Cards » 41
Text Size: S | M | L
Philosophy Is rigorous, logical analysis of our fundamental concepts, categories, and principles
Metaphysics Branch of philosophy that answers questions such as what exists? what is nature/structure of reality? What am I? Why does anything happen? Why is there anything rather than nothing? Do I ever act freely?
Epistemology Branch of philosophy that answers questions such as what is knowledge? what do I know? when am I justified in taking myself to know something? Is perception a source of knowledge? Is reason a source of knowlege?
Ethics Branch of philosophy that answers questions such as what is right/wrong? What is "right"/"wrong"? What is good/bad? What is "good"/"bad"?
Valid the reasoning is correct
1. The argument is valid
2. The premises are true
Invalid arguments can never be sound
Modus Ponens = Valid
If P then Q, P, therefore Q is valid
If P then Q, Q, therefore P is invalid
Test of Validity If the premises were true, would the conclusion be necessarily true? I.E. is it possible for premises to be true, and yet the conclusion be false?
Valid Argument A valid argument can have false premises, don't need to know the truth value of premises to determine validity
Modus Tollens = Always Valid
If p, then q, not q, therefore not p
Denying antecedent
If p, then q, not p, therefore not q invalid
Thomas Aquinas = says God is omnipotent which means all powerful and has infinite goodness, argues for omnipotence Argument from Motion, Argument from efficient causation, argument from contingency
Argument from Motion
P1: "Some things are in motion."
P2: "Whatever is moved is moved by another"
P3: The relation of mover to moved " cannot go on to infinity."
C: A 1st mover is necessary
Argument from Efficient Causation
P1: There are efficient causes
P2: Nothing can be the efficient cause of itself
P3: The order of efficient causes cannot stretch back to infinity
C: There is a first efficient cause
Occam's Razor (the parsimony principle) If 2 theories explain some phenomenon equally well, the simpler theory of the two is more likely to be correct. (more can go wrong with more complex theory)
Essential Causal Succession The arm moves the hand. The hand moves the stick. The stick moves the rock.
Accidental Causal Succession Abraham Begat Isaac, begat = procreate, Issac Begat Jacob, We can explain Jacob's existence without having to explain the whole causal change.
Aristotles Causes
Material - Bronze
Formal - Arrangement of material
Efficient - Sculptor
Final - The end (telos), Goal purpose of sculptor
Argument from Contingency - Could not have existed
P1: Things in the world could not have existed
P2: Anything that could not have existed did not exist, at some time
P3: If everything is contingent (could haven of existed), at some point nothing existed.
P4: Something can't come from nothing
C: There is a necessary being
Samuel Clarke (1675 - 1729) If every link in the causal chain is dependent, what is the cause of the chain itself? Something has always existed, Whatever exists has a cause, What exists is either independent being or an infinite succession of dependent things, An infinite succession of dependent beings is a contradiction, Independent being is necessary being.
Disjunctive Syllogism
P1: Either P or Q
P2: Not P
C: Q
Affirming the Consequence Invalid
David Hume
There is no being whose non-existence implies a contradiction, nothing that is distinctly conceivable implies a contradiction, is the claim that conceivability entails possibility, how can anything that exists from eternity have a cause, since the relation implies a priority in time?
Hume's Skepticism and Causation Our knowledge of cause and effect relations is, infact, just knowledge of constant conjuctions or regular succession
Composition Fallacy Every brick in wall is red. Therefore, the wall is red. - not one, Every brick in the wall weighs 1 lb., therefore, the wall weighs 1 lb. this is composition fallacy
Principle of Sufficient Reason
Whatever exists has a cause
Based on Samuel Clarke
Structure of Clarke's Main Argument "Either P there has always existed some one unchangeable and independent being from which all other beings that are or ever were in the universe have received their original, or q there has been an infinite succession of changeable and dependant beings produced one from the other in an endless progression without any original cause at all. Not Q then P
Why not Q in Clarke's Argument If we consider such an infinite progression as one entire endless series of dependent beings, it's plain this whole series of beings can have no cause without its existence. And it is is plain it can have no reason within itself for its existence.
Teleology The study of purposes
Telos Purpose, Goal, Aim, End
Argument from Design Look in Notebook
Inductive Arguments Either Strong/ Weak not valid or invalid, by an inductive argument we attempt to show that some conclusion is probable. Because the inferential claims of such an argument is not that the conclusion follows from the premises necessarily, there is no question of the argument being valid or invalid. Inductive arguments are strong or weak.
Fallacy Weak Argument
Strong Argument from Analogy The operation of a camera is similar in many ways to the operation of the eye. If you are to see anything in a darkened room, the pupils of your eyes dilate. Accordingly if you take a photo in a darkened room the aperture of camera lens must first be open - strong argument
Weak Argument from Analogy If a car breaks down on freeway, a passing mechanic is not obligated to render emergency road service. For similiar reasons if a person suffers a heart attack on the street, a passing physician isn't obligated to render emergency assistance (fallacy)
Posit Hypothesise
Superfluos Not of importance
Empiricism Knowledge based on experience
Arbitrarily No good reason
A priori Independant of Experience
A posteriori Derived from experience - Hume only believed in this
Stephen Gould and Teleological Argument Look in notes