Human beings have a unique facility to reason,

it stems from our self conscious ability to know

that we exist. We are not like computers which
simply manipulate information and are not self-
aware.
Philosophy involves thinking in abstract ideas
(e.g not where I should go this afternoon but
why am I here at all)
This sort of thinking helps us to ask questions
that concern
our existence in relation to our place as
individuals in an
often puzzling world. First it allows us to work out
whether
the question is meaningful (and that we are
justified in pursuing and answer), second, it
helps us to work through the problem, obtain a
conclusion and decide whether that conclusion
is valid. Whether or not the conclusion is true will
The method of philosophy as a way of thinking
can be (and is) used in all fields of human
enquiry: scientific, ethical, religious, political or
any other matter of psychological importance to
us as individuals or members of society.
DOING PHILOSOPHY
We do philosophy all the time because we are
continually taking in information, thinking about it
and coming up with conclusions. We often arrive
at conclusions very different from other people,
however, human difference
is valuable and important the world would be a
very dull place if everyone thought x was good
looking but sometimes human difference is a
result of different people tackling thinking in
different ways. This may not be so important
when working out whether or not someone is
good
looking but it may have serious consequences
for the person accused of murder whose future
is dependent on a jury.
The reason to philosophise need not be
abstract. Primitive people were doing
philosophy when they thought about the
best
ways of trapping animals
for food. Should they dig a
hole and cover it to make a
trap, or should they make a
net, chase the animal and
Throw the net over it? If we
like to eat wild duck what
would our method of
catching them be? Would
the same reasoning apply to
bears? How we come to conclusions about
these questions involves us in thinking
Question

Because I like digging holes in the

ground and I like eating wild duck for
my dinner, I conclude that if I dig
holes in the ground I will be able to
catch wild duck (and have a
satisfying dinner).

Does this make sense?

If not why not?
Explain carefully your reasons for
holding this view.
Philosophy first started when human beings began to wonder
why their world was like it was. They assumed that the earth
was created by God but when they began to wonder about the
nature of God himself (eg who is he or she? Where is God? Is
God completely powerful? Is God good? Etc) they began to
philosophise. This sort of thinking is called metaphysics and is
to do with thinking about what and why things really are. All
philosophy in some way connects to this central metaphysical
theme.

What is the best approach to philosophy?

We can approach philosophy by looking at its history (eg The
ancient Greeks, Descartes etc) or we can study by topic
(philosophy of science, philosophy of mind etc). Both have their
merits. Whichever we choose, its important to have an
understanding of what philosophers have thought about and we
will be examining key works of the key philosophers. Philosophy
is also about using our imagination to come up with new ideas
and argue in their defence, or to challenge existing ideas by
providing rational arguments against them. It is an activity. To
argue effectively we need to be aware of what it is to
reason. There is little (or nothing) to be gained by proclaiming
Doing Philosophy - An exercise
For each of the following decide how you wish to respond to
the question then work out:
Why you think this?
What reasons you have for thinking this?
Where these reasons came from?
Why you believe your reasons?
If you would change your view if someone could convince
you otherwise?

1.Do you believe that war is wrong?

2.Do you believe that criminals should be punished for their
crimes or helped to lead better lives?
3.Do you think that the earth is flat?
4.Do you think that everyone in the world should have the
same amount of money?
5.Do you think homosexuality is natural and acceptable?
6.If forced to make a choice between the death of a baby or
the death of 10 baby dolphins what would you chose?
 LOGIC
In Star Trek when Spock is
referred to as being logical it is
usually taken to mean that he is
without emotion. Sherlock
Holmes is considered similarly
cold. Why is this? And what is
being logical anyway?
The madman is not
the man who has
lost his reason. The
madman is the man
who has lost
everything but his
reason.
 Introduction The master
of deduction
In one mystery concerning
the theft of an expensive
racehorse, a police officer
asks Sherlock Holmes if any
aspect of the crime strikes
him as significant. Yes, he
says the curious incident of
the dog in the night time.
The dog did nothing in the
night time says the hapless
police officer. That was the
curious incident, replies
Holmes.
How has Holmes deduced
the solution to the crime?
Solution
The solution to the crime
hinges on the fact that the
watchdog guarding the
horse did not bark in the
night, and from that Holmes
deduces that the thief must
have been known to the
dog. We can lay out Holmes
reasoning formally as
follows:

Watchdogs bark at
strangers.
The watchdog did not
bark at the thief.
Therefore the thief was
not a stranger.
Argument

We argue in different ways: we quarrel,

debate or persuade. In a philosophical
sense argument is used to persuade
others of your point of view. Although
quarrels may not have rules,
persuasion arguments do.

There are 2 categories of

argument: Deductive and
Inductive.
A deductive argument provides
conclusive support for its conclusion as
long as it is valid, an inductive
argument provides probable support for
1. Deductive argument
is a method of
ascertaining validity. A
properly constructed
deductive argument is
valid so if all its
premises are true then
its conclusion must be
true.
Aristotle (384-322BC) is credited with
inventing deductive arguments as a means to
drawing conclusions. By looking at his own
example we can see the form deductive
arguments take:

If the question were asked Is Socrates mortal?

then the following deductive argument could be
applied.

All men are mortal (1st premise)

Socrates is a man (2nd premise)
Socrates is mortal (conclusion)

The conclusion follows from the premise. A valid

deductive argument will always lead to a valid
conclusion but the truth of the conclusion relies
on the truth of the premises.
Cartman gives us another example.

If the boys combine their lost teeth,

then theyll get money from the
Tooth Fairy (premise 1)
If they get money from the Tooth
Fairy, then they can buy a PS3 (premise 2)
-------------------------------------------
Hence, if the boys combine their lost
teeth
then they can buy a PS3 (conclusion)
2. Inductive argument is a
method of ascertaining
the degree of certainty the
premises confer on the
conclusion. A properly
constructed inductive
argument has strength in
that if all the premises are
true then the conclusion is
probably true.
How sure are you that some day you will
die? What evidence do you have for your
belief?

While deductive reasoning goes from the

general to the particular, another kind of
reasoning known as induction, goes in
the opposite direction from the
particular to the general. With reference
to the above example, my belief that all
human beings are mortal is based on
the observation that in history, every
human being I know of has eventually
died, and I have never heard of a human
being who didnt die. Therefore I can say
with confidence that all observed
human beings have died. Our inductive
reasoning can therefore lead us to the
South Park offers another example:

Because in the past when we

mentioned towel related things,
Towelie has always showed up.
(premise 1)
And because we will mention
Something towel related now.
(premise 2)
-------------------------------------------------
 Final Thoughts
On a practical level as students of philosophy you will
need to write essays that show evidence of sound
rational conclusions drawn from the application of
rigorously applied induced or deduced logic. This will
give far greater weight and importance to your claims.
On an even more serious note it is through fallacious
reasoning or faulty reasoning that many people
seem to make poor decisions. In South Park the case is
put forward in the episode called Chef Aid where a
prominent lawyer successfully applies the Chewbacca
defence to prove a point to the jury and acquit the
record company of being found guilty of copyright
violations of Chefs original song.
This South Park portrayal of absurd
reasoning is funny in the cartoon.
However its not so funny when we see
faulty reasoning at work in the real world.
Consider the following conclusions drawn.
All Jews are vermin
Vermin needs to be destroyed
All Jews need to be destroyed
OR
All terrorists are evil
All terrorists are Muslim
All Muslims are evil
OR
All Americans are immoral
Immorality is punishable by death
I will sacrifice my life to bring
death to Americans.

Logic is the study of the principles of correct

reasoning
associated with the formation and analysis of
arguments. A claim is shown to be true or false
as a result of evidence, which can take the forms
of either direct testimony of your senses,
explanations, the testimony of others, appeal to
well-established theories, appeal to appropriate
authority, appeal to definitions and good
arguments, among others.