Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Good is possible But in order to answer that he must first answer the more general question: how do we know anything?
What is Knowledge?
I parked my car in the lot, do I know where my
car is?
What is Knowledge? II
So, if we are to have real knowledge it must
Non-physical
eternal
is some knowledge already and then try to figure out what is going on there
Geometry/mathematics
non-physical, eternal, and unchanging objects that are the objects of knowledge reason
reason
Degrees of Perfection
Degrees of Perfection II
How do you know that the triangles are not
This, says Plato, is true of everything You know that some actions are not perfectly just But how could you know this unless there was Perfect Justice and you knew it? That is the Form of Justice
common The objects must all have something in common, or why else would we put them in a group together? But they dont have anything physically in common
same time
Metaphysics
Higher Forms Understanding
Epistemology
Intelligible World
Lower Forms Reasoning
Knowledge
Visible World
Perception
Opinion
Imagination
In Platos allegory, discarding ignorant beliefs and embracing the truth can
be a disturbing process, as we are forced to see things objectively, illuminated as they really are, rather than shrouded in the shadows of bias and distortion. Describe an experience in which achieving a knowledgeable, truthful insight was a disturbing experience for you.
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Explain what you believe Plato means by these two contrasting ideas of education. Describe two examples from your own educational experience, one which involved turning your whole soul toward reality and another in which you attempted to put the capacity for sight into your soul.
Evaluating your life as a whole, at what stage in Platos allegory would you
Aristotle
Lives 384-322 BCE
(Socrates dies in 399)
inductive argument
Natural philosophy is a theoretical science The goal is to start with particular things and
discern their essential characteristics, which we then use as the first premise in a syllogism
Dialectic
Demonstratio ns
Opinions
Conclusions
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Explanation
What we want are explanations
An explanation does not merely tell us THAT
Explanation II
Say I wanted to explain why copper
conducts electricity
First Principles
The first principles of a science are known
directly by reason in a way that does not need any further proof
Exactly like geometry: that the shortest distance
contradiction
than itself
Necessary
The law of non-contradiction is supposed to
Reductio ad Absurdum
Accordingly to show that some claim results in a
alternative
Gives us a powerful way to argue to show that something is true we by assume that it is false and showing that it leads to a contradiction So the original assumption must be false
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Platos version
Plato tries to give an explanation This thing is a human being because it
The Form is eternal, perfect and unchanging It is the essence of what it means to be a human
Participation
the Form
explanation for why humans differ from (say) dogs We are simply told that they resemble something that resembles something that resembles something.
Aristotle
So he rejects Platos metaphysics and ontology He also rejects atomism
The idea of void is contradictory as it implies that
what does not exist exists If it were true the world would not be explainable We would not be able to say why the stuff around us MUST be the way that it is since according to atomism everything is the result of chance For Aristotle, the world is ordered & law governed
Starting Over
Aristotle agrees that we want knowledge of
essences
objects around us
Starting Over II
For each red object we can separate the
But still, the form of red is real It exists as part of the object This becomes part of his response to Parmenides He is going to argue that change consists in material coming to have a form that it did not have before
cause But he really means reasons that explain why the thing happened the way that it did Or is the way that it is
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
The Sculpture
So, consider some sculpture of Socrates What are the reasons that this particular sculpture is the way that it is?
has four causes each which partially explain why it is the way it is
Part of the answer is that it is made from a certain
material If it were made from spaghetti it would be very different Part of the answer is that it has a certain shape It resembles Socrates Part of the answer is that someone sculpted it
The 4 Causes
Material
The thing that is the same before and after the
change
Formal
The thing that is different before and after the
change
Efficient
The thing that does the changing
Final
that for the sake of which the change is done
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Change
To give an explanation of a change we need to
Examples
Material-stuff being sculpted (say, Marble) Formal-shape sculptor intends to make
4 Causes II
2. Heating a pan Material-THE PAN! Formal-heat Efficient-fire (or something hot) Final- to get a hot pan When the pan is (actually) cold it is potentially
hot
receive the form of heat So, the pan is not potentially an eagle
4 Causes III
In order to become actually hot the pan needs
to come into contact with something that is itself already actually hot
In his terminology, this thing must already posses
the form of heat This thing then transmits, or transfers the form to the material, thereby causing the pan to become actually hot
So, in a sense the cold and hot do exist in the
eternal realm of Being. Thus, the perfect Idea of horse is the most real element in his metaphysic, the actual horse the least real. Aristotle inverts this hierarchy of reality: the individual horse is the most real element in his metaphysic, whereas the abstract concept of horse the least real. Explain which view you find to be most intelligible and the reasons why.
Aristotle criticized Platos concept of participation, calling it a
mere empty phrase and a poetic metaphor. Do you agree with his critique? How do you think Plato would defend himself?
continuing after death. Aristotle believed that the soul is a natural phenomenon that gives form and purpose to the body, but ceases to exist after the body dies. Which view of the soul do you find most compelling? Why?
Aristotle believed that the entire universe is purposeful, both individually
and collectively. Do you agree with this contention? Explain why or why not and provide an example to support your perspective.
Although Aristotle does not believe in a supernatural Creator or God, he
does conclude that there must be a first (Final) cause, a prime mover, pure thought, thinking thought. Evaluate the cogency of Aristotles idea and the reasoning he uses to reach this conclusion.
REN DESCARTES How do You Know Whether or Not You are Dreaming?
Newton-- 1643-1727
At this time in history the dominant philosophy
Descartes
But Descartes is still a Rationalist He is very critical of Aristotles views (but is also in
Descartes II
His goal is to find a foundation on which all other
He agrees with Plato that knowledge requires But rejects Platos idea that the physical world is
not knowable
Certainty
But what does it mean to be certain?
It is being unable to doubt Something that cannot possibly be doubted is
certain
(MoD)
MoD
This does not mean that he thinks that they are
actually false
what so ever
MoD II
This will guarantee that whatever cant be
are unreliable
We must be able to trust them generally, right? Surely I cant doubt that there is a table here in this room, can I? Yes I can I have seen tables in my dreams, I could be
dreaming now
Step Two II
I cant rule it out Anything I would cite as evidence would be something that would also be true in the dream So, if I say I see the table, I hear it, I feel it or whatever, that is, if I cite my experience of the table as evidence, It would look, sound, etc, exactly the same in my dream Except in my dream there is no table at all, just my experience as of a table
the matrix
now but none of it would be real He does not actually believe that this is true His point is that we cannot use this as the foundation of our knowledge because there is this (albeit small) possibility that we cant rule out
mathematical truths should be true This is where Plato looked for certainty Descartes thinks that he can imagine a scenario in which 1+1 does not equal 2
We are all familiar with making mistakes in
mathematics
Step Three II
You do some problem, get some answer that
problem, getting an answer, checking your work, getting the same answer
Only to find out that the answer is wrong Because we are making the same mistake, but not
noticing it
1+1=2 is true By hiding some mistake from me every time I count or do mathematics
1+1=(step)3
1.) Let x=1 2.) Then x2=x (i.e. one squared is one) 3.) Now lets subtract 1 from each side Then (x2-1)=(x-1) 4.) Now lets factor the left hand side Then (x-1)(x+1)=(x-1) 5.) Now lets divide each side by (x-1) Then (x+1)=1 6.) Lets add 1 to each side Then (x+2)=2 7.) But since x=1 we have 3=2 Another way to write 2 is 1+1,
so we have 1+1=3
Review
Descartes developed a method designed to
deliver certainty
The Method of Doubt For the purposes of the method, if we can doubt a belief then we treat that belief as false He doubts that the world is the way that it
appears
That there is a physical world at all And finally the mathematical truths
The Foundation
So now he has discovered something certain He exists as a thinking thing Whether there is a physical world or not he cannot doubt that he exists This is the foundation on which he plans to build
mind
These ideas are self-evident necessary truths Their truth is apprehended by rational intuition This is, of course, the way in which he is still in the
Aristotelian tradition
results
characteristic is thinking
It is possible that he exist without a body But not possible that he exist without thinking
properties
A smell
But take this wax and hold it next to a fire and all
this process
with the object We perceive the real nature of the wax solely with our mind
Physical objects never think Their essential characteristic is extension (taking up space) and are purely mechanical The Wax argument; the real nature of the wax is grasped by the mind as a substance which can change shape
experiences), which are mental (i.e. nonphysical), mental life, which you have immediate and unfailing access to
Descartes Picture
Judgment
Causation
Causation
Judgment
Causation
Causation
An Analogy
Imagine that you have been raise in a room
An Analogy II
It might be the case that someone wants us to
think that there are people out there who are doing various things, to fool us
Judgment
Causation
Mission Accomplished
Since God exists, and He is not a deceiver I can
and confused
experience of wondering whether much of what you had been brought up to believe as true was in face unreliable? If so, identify some of the main beliefs or values that you called into question. Was there a particular event that stimulated the process of doubt and examination? What was the outcome of your reflective questioning?
situation as you are reading this text, just as he does. Then try to trace the pattern of thinking: Can you imagine that what you think is real is actually a dream? How can you be sure? Havent you had dreams that were at least as realistic as the current situation in which you find yourself? Is there any clear criteria you can use to differentiate between when you are dreaming and when you are awake?
Try to replicate Descartes foundational starting point, I think,
therefore I am. Does your ability to think convince you, for once and for all, that you exist? What does it mean for you to say, I exist? Exactly how would you describe the I that exists?
Copyright 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
the future?
Is the belief falsifiable?