# PHLA10 Reason and Truth Exercise 1

Save this PDF as:

Size: px
Start display at page:

## Transcription

1 Y e P a g e 1 Exercise 1 Pg When is an idea or statement valid? (trick question) A statement or an idea cannot be valid; they can only be true or false. Being valid or invalid are properties of arguments, meaning that only they can be valid or invalid. Arguments can still be valid even if the premises or conclusions are obviously untrue, or if the premises and conclusion are all false. 3. Invent an example of a valid argument that has false premises and a true conclusion. Invent an example of an invalid argument that has true premises and a true conclusion. Valid argument: All dogs can fly. Jack is a dog. So Jack can fly. Invalid argument: If the dog is running, then the dog has four legs. The dog has four legs. The dog is running. 5. Which of the following argument forms is valid? Which is invalid? For each of the invalid ones, construct an example of an argument with that form in which the premises are true and the conclusion false: (a) Valid (b) Invalid If Sam lives in Wisconsin, then Sam lives in the USA Sam lives in the USA Sam lives in Wisconsin Converse (c) Invalid If Sam lives in Wisconsin, then Sam lives in the USA Sam doesn t live in Wisconsin Sam doesn t live in the USA Contrapositive

2 Y e P a g e 2 (d) Valid 7. What does it mean to say that an argument is circular, that it begs the question? Construct an example of an argument of this type different from the ones presented in this chapter. When an argument is circular or that it begs the question, it does not give you a good reason to accept the conclusion even if the premises and conclusion are true. If the premise was not accepted, then the conclusion would not be accepted either. The Earth is a planet. Therefore, the Earth is a planet. Pg What is the difference between deductive validity and inductive strength? Deductive validity is either valid or invalid, there is no middle ground. An argument of this type is based on whether the premises are true, which in turn indicate whether the conclusion is true. Furthermore, deductive valid arguments cannot introduce new information in the conclusion that wasn t already there, while inductive strength arguments can conclude on things that are beyond what was in the premises. Inductive strength can either be stronger or weaker depending on the sample size and the unbiasedness of it. 2. What is the difference between induction and abduction? Induction is taking a description of a sample and extending it to things outside the sample, for example sending out polls to figure out what the country s preference of political parties are Abduction is reaching the best explanation possible based on evidence and reasoning. 3. What factors affect how strong an inductive argument is? The factors affecting how strong an inductive are the sample size and the unbiasedness of the sample. Exercise 2 1. Here's a little logical puzzle: you are in a strange land where everyone is either a knight or a knave. Knights always tell the truth; knaves always lie. You meet two of them, A and B. A says "we are both knaves". What are A and B? Prove it. If A is right, then he has to be lying because he said that he is a knave as well. A cannot be a knight because they cannot both be knaves or that would make his statement true. As thus, B must be a knight. A is a knave and B is a knight. 2. What are the four main characteristics of God as Aquinas understood it?

3 Y e P a g e 3 Aquinas characteristics of God are that he is a personal God, omnipotent (all-powerful), omniscient (allknowing) and omni-benevolent (all-good). Aquinas concept of God is also known as PKG. 3. What is the primary difference between the conception of motion that Aquinas accepted and Newton's conception of motion? Aquinas conception of motion was that there needed to be an outside force acting on it for it to be moving and that that force had to be kept for the object to continue being in motion. Newton s law of motion says that an object s acceleration will not change unless acted on by a force so it could remain in uniform motion. 4. Explain why the "Birthday Fallacy" is a fallacy. The Birthday Fallacy is considered to be a fallacy because the second premise does not necessarily follow the first. While the first premise, every person has a birthday a day on which he or she was born, is true, the second premise, there is a single day that is everybody s birthday, does not mean that everybody was born on the same day. The fact that there was a cause for the beginning of events does not mean that it was the same cause for all the events. 5. What is the valid deductive logical form of a reductio ad absurdum argument? If P is false, then A is true. A is false. P is true. 6. What is the difference between necessity and contingency? Necessity means that an object exists in all possible worlds while contingency means that an object doesn t exist in all possible worlds. 7. What is a "necessary being"? Explain in terms of possible worlds. A necessary being is something that exists in all possible worlds. It does not depend on anything for its existence at any time from the past to the present to the future. 8. Why does Sober say that certainty is in the subjective realm while necessity is objective? Certainty is about how sure the person is of themselves about a particular statement and is as such subjective. However, necessity has nothing to do with what a person thinks or believes and is therefore objective.

4 Y e P a g e 4 Exercise 3 1. Explain the structure of arguments from analogy. Arguments of this sort compare two things together, the analog and the target. There must be similarities between the two for the analogy to be good. Features from the analog are compared to the target. For example, the intricate design of the universe compared to one of a watch. 2. Why might the argument from design be a very weak inductive argument? An inductive argument relies on sample size and extrapolating data from it to the broader view. In the argument that the universe was created by an intelligent being says that that data must have been seen in other universes, and then applied to ours. 3. What is the difference between theistic evolutionism and creationism according to Sober? Theistic evolutionism states that it is God who set the evolutionary process in motion. Creationism denies that evolution is able to give rise to new species and that God plays a direct role in shaping organisms. 4. What is the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics? A closed system will move from states of greater order to states of lesser order. 5. Roughly explain how natural selection works. Amongst a population, mutations will arise in the genes at random which may or may not be advantageous. This affects the fitness of the organism. If it is advantageous and allows the organism to better survive, its chances of reproduction improve and these genes are thus passed on to the next generation. 6. An important concept in the theory of evolution is that of fitness. What is fitness? Fitness is an organism s ability to survive and reproduce. 7. Give a new example of a correlation with a common cause. A dog starts to bark and then a few minutes later the doorbell rings. When the dog doesn t bark the doorbell doesn t ring. There may be a correlation between when the dog barks and when the doorbell rings.

5 Y e P a g e 5 8. What is "the tree of life"? All living things are related to each other, being descendent of a common ancestor. Exercise 4 1. Why does Sober say that proving existence from a concept or definition is "very surprising"? A definition of concept only explains what characteristics something would have if it existed, not that it does in fact exist. 2. What is the difference between conceivability and possibility? Possibility is an objective point of view. It does not matter whether people believe it or think it to be true. Conceivability is a subjective point of view. 3. Why is the "perfect island" a problem for the ontological argument? The perfect island is showing that the ontological argument is wrong through reductio ad absurdum. By replacing God with P-island and being for island, Gaunilo tries to deduce that: A P-island is by definition the greatest possible island. An island that fails to exist in the actual world (while existing in other possible worlds) is less perfect than an island that exists in all possible worlds. Hence, a P-island exists necessarily. The existence of a perfect island cannot be determined a priori and as such, neither can the existence of God through the ontological argument. 4. Try to give three clear examples of analytic truths and three of synthetic truths Analytic truths are a priori statements and are definitions or its deductive consequences. All monkeys are animals. All boats are able to float. All apples are fruits. Synthetic truths are a posterior statements and does not follow from definition but from experience. The orbit of the earth is elliptical. Men are more likely to be colour blind than women. The shoulder blades of a cat sit in muscle only.

6 Y e P a g e 6 5. Are all falsifiable statements false? Explain your answer. A falsifiable statement does not mean that it is false. Such a statement means that it must be able to prove that some observations are not true. It can also be refuted through valid deductive arguments if the observations are false. 6. What is the difference bewteen prudential and evidential reasons for belief? A prudential reason is when someone believes for their self-interest. Evidential reason is when someone believes because there are facts that can back up the claim. 7. Consider this situation: you are rolling a single die and you get paid \$1.20 if you roll either a 1, 2, 3 or 4 but you have to pay \$1.50 if you roll a 5 or 6. What is the expected utility of this game? [(Payoff/utility) x (Chance)] [(Risk) x (Chance)] = (Expected Utility) (1.20 x 2/3) (1.50 x 1/3) = 0.30 The expected utility of this game is \$ Try to explain Clifford's objection against Pascal's (and James's) argument. Clifford says that people should not believe things when there is insufficient evidence to support them, His argument is consequentialist, as he is saying that it is wrong to perform this action because it has bad consequences, such as regressing into barbaric times and losing the will to test and inquire. Exercise 9 1. What is the difference between dualism and materialism? Dualism states that the world is composed of physical things (such as the brain) and mental things (such as the mind). Materialism says that there are only physical things in the world and not mental things; to materialism, the mind and the brain is one. 2. What is Leibniz's Law? What is it good for? Leibniz s Law states that if X = Y then any property of X is a property of Y and vice versa. Likewise, even if one property is amiss, then you can prove that the two objects are different. This Law defends the theory of dualism saying that the mind is immortal while the brain is not.

7 Y e P a g e 7 3. Explain what is wrong (according to Sober) with the first Cartesian argument for dualism. Leibniz s Law has holes. If someone were to have a double identity, people could believe that there are differences between what they believe are two people. However in this case, the mistake is that we think a property of the observers is a property of the person with the double identity. As such, if Descartes can doubt that he has a body but not a mind does not show a difference between the two. 4. What is the second Cartesian argument for dualism? This argument says that there is a difference between the mind and brain because the brain has spatial properties while the mind does not. How would you define the mind as having spatial properties though? 5. What is analogical argument which supports the claim that we have knowledge of the mental states of other people? In my case, I notice that I produce behaviour B, I usually am in the mental state M. I observe that other individuals O are now producing behaviour B. So, O are in the mental state M. 6. What is the circularity (Sober calls it "incompleteness") problem facing logical behaviourism? If someone believes it is raining outside, they will take an umbrella when they go outside. However, what if that someone wants to get wet from the rain? Mental states depend on each other. 7. What is a "dispositional analysis" of some concept? Give a new example. The analysis explains a certain behaviour of something when it is placed in a certain situation. 8. What does Sober mean by saying that there is a "physical basis" for any disposition? The basis is the internal mechanisms of something which causes it to behave in a certain way. Exercise 6 1. Try to explain Sigmund Freud's explanation for why people believe in God.

8 Y e P a g e 8 Freud said that people believe in God for the psychological benefits. To make sense of the universe, instead of saying that it is impersonal to us, we make it seem so that it has an interest in humans. 2. Outline the argument against the existence of God based on the presence of evil in the world. (1) If God exists, then he is PKG. (2) If God is PKG, then there would be no evil (If God is omniscient, he knows that there is evil. If God is omni-benevolent, he detests evil. If God is omni-potent, he can rid the evil. God is omniscient, omni-benevolent, omni-potent.) (3) There is evil. (4) Thus God does not exist. 3. Explain the distinction between "theodicy" and "defense" in the philosophy of religion. Theodicy rejects the second premise and accepts the first and third one. Just because God is PKG does not mean there is no evil in the world. Defense rejects the first premise. 4. Is the argument from evil against the existence of God a deductively valid argument? Why or why not. The argument is deductively valid since the form can be used for other arguments. 5. What is "soul improving evil"? Soul improving evil help us become better people as we go through hardship and strengthens our character. 6. Outline the "free will defense" against the problem of evil? God made humans free, meaning it is up to humans to decide whether they do good or evil. However, human decide to do evil. 7. Even if there are soul improving evils and even if some evil is the result of the free will of creatures other than God, does that show the argument from evil fails?

9 Y e P a g e 9 No, because God could have made it that humans could always freely choose good. Free will does not equate goodness. People could have the free choice of doing good. God is after all a free being who does good. 8. What is "natural evil"? Natural evil are evils that do not result from any kind of free will, such as earthquakes or tornadoes. Exercise 6 1. What is the difference between "know how knowledge" and "object knowledge"? Know how knowledge is when the subject s behaviour knows what to do according to certain principles and having certain abilities. Object knowledge requires that the subject directly knows the object. 2. Give some new (not from Sober) examples of necessary and sufficient conditions? Necessary condition: If and only if (1) it has a screen, (2) it has a keyboard, and (3) it has a central processing unit, for any object, the object is a computer. Sufficient condition: An object is a computer if and only if (1) it has a screen, (2) it has a keyboard, and (3) it has a central processing unit. 3. Outline the three conditions that make up the JTB theory of knowledge. The theory says that a subject knows a proposition if and only if: 1. The subject believes that proposition 2. The proposition is true 3. The subject is justified in believing the proposition. 4. Try to think up your own counterexample to the JTB theory (an example that is of the same kind as Sober produces). A person s dog has always been very mild and gentle, so they know that it will knows and believes that it will not bite any strangers. However, that day, the dog got stung by a bee as a stranger was passing by and startled the dog, causing it to bite a stranger. 5. What does Sober mean by the philosophical term "skepticism"?

10 Y e P a g e 10 Skepticism is the conclusion that we do not know anything. Knowledge means that it is impossible for it to be wrong and is known through a posteriori. However, that relies on experiences which rely on sense which can very easily be deceived. 6. What is the difference between the "axioms" and the "theorems" of a theory (such as for example geometry)? Axioms are self-evident, meaning they cannot be false and are absolutely certain. Theorems follow the axioms on pure logic. 7. Outline the core idea of the foundationalist theory of knowledge. Foundationalism says that there is a foundation of beliefs which are solid and true, then superstructural beliefs which are also knowledge because they are resting on the solid foundation. 8. How does Descartes's "method of doubt" discover the foundations of knowledge? The method of doubt asks if there is any doubt at all for any proposition that can be thought of. If it s possible to doubt a proposition, it isn t foundational. If it isn t possible to doubt it, the belief is foundational. However, it does not mean that the belief is false, just not absolutely certain.

### Do we have knowledge of the external world?

Do we have knowledge of the external world? This book discusses the skeptical arguments presented in Descartes' Meditations 1 and 2, as well as how Descartes attempts to refute skepticism by building our

### Creation & necessity

Creation & necessity Today we turn to one of the central claims made about God in the Nicene Creed: that God created all things visible and invisible. In the Catechism, creation is described like this:

### Descartes and Foundationalism

Cogito, ergo sum Who was René Descartes? 1596-1650 Life and Times Notable accomplishments modern philosophy mind body problem epistemology physics inertia optics mathematics functions analytic geometry

### Philosophical Arguments

Philosophical Arguments An introduction to logic and philosophical reasoning. Nathan D. Smith, PhD. Houston Community College Nathan D. Smith. Some rights reserved You are free to copy this book, to distribute

### complete state of affairs and an infinite set of events in one go. Imagine the following scenarios:

-1- -2- EPISTEMOLOGY AND METHODOLOGY 3. We are in a physics laboratory and make the observation that all objects fall at a uniform Can we solve the problem of induction, and if not, to what extent is it

### WHAT IS HUME S FORK? Certainty does not exist in science.

WHAT IS HUME S FORK? www.prshockley.org Certainty does not exist in science. I. Introduction: A. Hume divides all objects of human reason into two different kinds: Relation of Ideas & Matters of Fact.

### The Ontological Argument

Running Head: THE ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT 1 The Ontological Argument By Andy Caldwell Salt Lake Community College Philosophy of Religion 2350 THE ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT 2 Abstract This paper will reproduce,

### I Don't Believe in God I Believe in Science

I Don't Believe in God I Believe in Science This seems to be a common world view that many people hold today. It is important that when we look at statements like this we spend a proper amount of time

### Boghossian & Harman on the analytic theory of the a priori

Boghossian & Harman on the analytic theory of the a priori PHIL 83104 November 2, 2011 Both Boghossian and Harman address themselves to the question of whether our a priori knowledge can be explained in

### Rationalism. A. He, like others at the time, was obsessed with questions of truth and doubt

Rationalism I. Descartes (1596-1650) A. He, like others at the time, was obsessed with questions of truth and doubt 1. How could one be certain in the absence of religious guidance and trustworthy senses

### Evolution and the Mind of God

Evolution and the Mind of God Robert T. Longo rtlongo370@gmail.com September 3, 2017 Abstract This essay asks the question who, or what, is God. This is not new. Philosophers and religions have made many

### Logical (formal) fallacies

Fallacies in academic writing Chad Nilep There are many possible sources of fallacy an idea that is mistakenly thought to be true, even though it may be untrue in academic writing. The phrase logical fallacy

### Discussion Notes for Bayesian Reasoning

Discussion Notes for Bayesian Reasoning Ivan Phillips - http://www.meetup.com/the-chicago-philosophy-meetup/events/163873962/ Bayes Theorem tells us how we ought to update our beliefs in a set of predefined

### Ethical non-naturalism

Michael Lacewing Ethical non-naturalism Ethical non-naturalism is usually understood as a form of cognitivist moral realism. So we first need to understand what cognitivism and moral realism is before

### Chapter 5: Ways of knowing Reason (p. 111)

Chapter 5: Ways of knowing Reason (p. 111) Neils Bohr (1885 1962) to Einstein: You are not thinking. You are merely being logical. Reason is one of the four ways of knowing: Perception Language Emotion

### Immanuel Kant, Analytic and Synthetic. Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics Preface and Preamble

+ Immanuel Kant, Analytic and Synthetic Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics Preface and Preamble + Innate vs. a priori n Philosophers today usually distinguish psychological from epistemological questions.

### We [now turn to the question] of the existence of God. By God I shall understand a

Sophia Project Philosophy Archives Arguments for the Existence of God A. C. Ewing We [now turn to the question] of the existence of God. By God I shall understand a supreme mind regarded as either omnipotent

### PHILOSOPHER S TOOL KIT 1. ARGUMENTS PROFESSOR JULIE YOO 1.1 DEDUCTIVE VS INDUCTIVE ARGUMENTS

PHILOSOPHER S TOOL KIT PROFESSOR JULIE YOO 1. Arguments 1.1 Deductive vs Induction Arguments 1.2 Common Deductive Argument Forms 1.3 Common Inductive Argument Forms 1.4 Deduction: Validity and Soundness

### Chapter Summaries: Three Types of Religious Philosophy by Clark, Chapter 1

Chapter Summaries: Three Types of Religious Philosophy by Clark, Chapter 1 In chapter 1, Clark begins by stating that this book will really not provide a definition of religion as such, except that it

### Think by Simon Blackburn. Chapter 1b Knowledge

Think by Simon Blackburn Chapter 1b Knowledge According to A.C. Grayling, if cogito ergo sum is an argument, it is missing a premise. This premise is: A. Everything that exists thinks. B. Everything that

### New Chapter: Philosophy of Religion

Intro to Philosophy Phil 110 Lecture 3: 1-16 Daniel Kelly I. Mechanics A. Upcoming Readings 1. Today we ll discuss a. Aquinas s The Summa Theologica (The Cosmological Argument) b. Anselm, Proslogium (The

### Relevance. Premises are relevant to the conclusion when the truth of the premises provide some evidence that the conclusion is true

Relevance Premises are relevant to the conclusion when the truth of the premises provide some evidence that the conclusion is true Premises are irrelevant when they do not 1 Non Sequitur Latin for it does

### History of Modern Philosophy. Hume ( )

Hume 1 Hume (1711-1776) With Berkeley s idealism, some very uncomfortable consequences of Cartesian dualism, the split between mind and experience, on the one hand, and the body and the physical world

### Chapter 1. Introduction. 1.1 Deductive and Plausible Reasoning Strong Syllogism

Contents 1 Introduction 3 1.1 Deductive and Plausible Reasoning................... 3 1.1.1 Strong Syllogism......................... 3 1.1.2 Weak Syllogism.......................... 4 1.1.3 Transitivity

### Revelation: God revealing himself to religious believers.

Revelation: God revealing himself to religious believers. Nature of God - What God s character is like. Atheist a person who believes that there is no god. Agnostic A person who believes that we cannot

### Meditations on Knowledge, Truth, and Ideas

1 Copyright Jonathan Bennett [Brackets] enclose editorial explanations. Small dots enclose material that has been added, but can be read as though it were part of the original text. Occasional bullets,

### Is Klein an infinitist about doxastic justification?

Philos Stud (2007) 134:19 24 DOI 10.1007/s11098-006-9016-5 ORIGINAL PAPER Is Klein an infinitist about doxastic justification? Michael Bergmann Published online: 7 March 2007 Ó Springer Science+Business

### New Chapter: Philosophy of Religion

Intro to Philosophy Phil 110 Lecture 6: 1-25 Daniel Kelly I. Mechanics A. Upcoming Readings 1. Today we ll discuss a. Dennett, Show Me the Science b. Hume, Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion (10) c.

### Philosophy 5340 Epistemology Topic 4: Skepticism. Part 1: The Scope of Skepticism and Two Main Types of Skeptical Argument

1. The Scope of Skepticism Philosophy 5340 Epistemology Topic 4: Skepticism Part 1: The Scope of Skepticism and Two Main Types of Skeptical Argument The scope of skeptical challenges can vary in a number

### In Defense of Radical Empiricism. Joseph Benjamin Riegel. Chapel Hill 2006

In Defense of Radical Empiricism Joseph Benjamin Riegel A thesis submitted to the faculty of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

### The free will defense

The free will defense Last time we began discussing the central argument against the existence of God, which I presented as the following reductio ad absurdum of the proposition that God exists: 1. God

### Kripke on the distinctness of the mind from the body

Kripke on the distinctness of the mind from the body Jeff Speaks April 13, 2005 At pp. 144 ff., Kripke turns his attention to the mind-body problem. The discussion here brings to bear many of the results

### Ayer and Quine on the a priori

Ayer and Quine on the a priori November 23, 2004 1 The problem of a priori knowledge Ayer s book is a defense of a thoroughgoing empiricism, not only about what is required for a belief to be justified

### The problems of induction in scientific inquiry: Challenges and solutions. Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction Defining induction...

The problems of induction in scientific inquiry: Challenges and solutions Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction... 2 2.0 Defining induction... 2 3.0 Induction versus deduction... 2 4.0 Hume's descriptive

### Table of x III. Modern Modal Ontological Arguments Norman Malcolm s argument Charles Hartshorne s argument A fly in the ointment? 86

Table of Preface page xvii divinity I. God, god, and God 3 1. Existence and essence questions 3 2. Names in questions of existence and belief 4 3. Etymology and semantics 6 4. The core attitudinal conception

### The Correspondence between Leibniz and Arnauld

The Correspondence between Leibniz and Arnauld G. W. Leibniz and Antoine Arnauld Copyright Jonathan Bennett 2017. All rights reserved [Brackets] enclose editorial explanations. Small dots enclose material

### Review Deductive Logic. Wk2 Day 2. Critical Thinking Ninjas! Steps: 1.Rephrase as a syllogism. 2.Choose your weapon

Review Deductive Logic Wk2 Day 2 Checking Validity of Deductive Argument Steps: 1.Rephrase as a syllogism Identify premises and conclusion. Look out for unstated premises. Place them in order P(1), P(2),

### Philosophy of Mathematics Kant

Philosophy of Mathematics Kant Owen Griffiths oeg21@cam.ac.uk St John s College, Cambridge 20/10/15 Immanuel Kant Born in 1724 in Königsberg, Prussia. Enrolled at the University of Königsberg in 1740 and

### Words and Meaning Knowing what one means by X or Y is crucial in order to have any meaningful dialogue. Example: Consider the following interesting di

Arguments For and Against the Existence of God Analysis and Discussion by Dr. Michael Aristidou August 2008 Words and Meaning Knowing what one means by X or Y is crucial in order to have any meaningful

### Logic: Deductive and Inductive by Carveth Read M.A. CHAPTER IX CHAPTER IX FORMAL CONDITIONS OF MEDIATE INFERENCE

CHAPTER IX CHAPTER IX FORMAL CONDITIONS OF MEDIATE INFERENCE Section 1. A Mediate Inference is a proposition that depends for proof upon two or more other propositions, so connected together by one or

### Logic and Theism: Arguments For and Against Beliefs in God, by John Howard Sobel.

1 Logic and Theism: Arguments For and Against Beliefs in God, by John Howard Sobel. Cambridge University Press, 2003. 672 pages. \$95. ROBERT C. KOONS, University of Texas This is a terrific book. I'm often

### 5 A Modal Version of the

5 A Modal Version of the Ontological Argument E. J. L O W E Moreland, J. P.; Sweis, Khaldoun A.; Meister, Chad V., Jul 01, 2013, Debating Christian Theism The original version of the ontological argument

### Chapter Summaries: Introduction to Christian Philosophy by Clark, Chapter 1

Chapter Summaries: Introduction to Christian Philosophy by Clark, Chapter 1 In chapter 1, Clark reviews the purpose of Christian apologetics, and then proceeds to briefly review the failures of secular

### Lesson 2 The Existence of God Cause & Effect Apologetics Press Introductory Christian Evidences Correspondence Course

Lesson 2 The Existence of God Cause & Effect Apologetics Press Introductory Christian Evidences Correspondence Course THE EXISTENCE OF GOD CAUSE & EFFECT One of the most basic issues that the human mind

### Lecture 5 Philosophy of Mind: Dualism Barbara Montero On the Philosophy of the Mind

Lecture 5 Philosophy of Mind: Dualism Barbara Montero On the Philosophy of the Mind 1 Agenda 1. Barbara Montero 2. The Mind-Body Problem 3. Descartes Argument for Dualism 4. Theistic Version of Descartes

### The Ontological Argument for the existence of God. Pedro M. Guimarães Ferreira S.J. PUC-Rio Boston College, July 13th. 2011

The Ontological Argument for the existence of God Pedro M. Guimarães Ferreira S.J. PUC-Rio Boston College, July 13th. 2011 The ontological argument (henceforth, O.A.) for the existence of God has a long

### THEISM AND BELIEF. Etymological note: deus = God in Latin; theos = God in Greek.

THEISM AND BELIEF Etymological note: deus = God in Latin; theos = God in Greek. A taxonomy of doxastic attitudes Belief: a mental state the content of which is taken as true or an assertion put forward

### Lecture 3: Deduction and Induction

Lecture 3: Deduction and Induction Right then, I think we ought to start. So welcome to everyone here and welcome to everyone on the podcast. Anyone who didn't get the thing I sent out last week about

### Theory of Knowledge. 5. That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. (Christopher Hitchens). Do you agree?

Theory of Knowledge 5. That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. (Christopher Hitchens). Do you agree? Candidate Name: Syed Tousif Ahmed Candidate Number: 006644 009

### From Necessary Truth to Necessary Existence

Prequel for Section 4.2 of Defending the Correspondence Theory Published by PJP VII, 1 From Necessary Truth to Necessary Existence Abstract I introduce new details in an argument for necessarily existing

### Grounding and Analyticity. David Chalmers

Grounding and Analyticity David Chalmers Interlevel Metaphysics Interlevel metaphysics: how the macro relates to the micro how nonfundamental levels relate to fundamental levels Grounding Triumphalism

### Hume s An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding

Hume s An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding G. J. Mattey Spring, 2017 / Philosophy 1 After Descartes The greatest success of the philosophy of Descartes was that it helped pave the way for the mathematical

### ARGUMENTS. Arguments. arguments

ARGUMENTS Arguments arguments 1 Argument Worksheet 1. An argument is a collection of propositions with one proposition, the conclusion, following from the other propositions, the premises. Inference is

### Ethics Demonstrated in Geometrical Order

1 Copyright Jonathan Bennett [Brackets] enclose editorial explanations. Small dots enclose material that has been added, but can be read as though it were part of the original text. Occasional bullets,

### Mistaking Category Mistakes: A Response to Gilbert Ryle. Evan E. May

Mistaking Category Mistakes: A Response to Gilbert Ryle Evan E. May Part 1: The Issue A significant question arising from the discipline of philosophy concerns the nature of the mind. What constitutes

### THE ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT

36 THE ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT E. J. Lowe The ontological argument is an a priori argument for God s existence which was first formulated in the eleventh century by St Anselm, was famously defended by René

### Ancient Greek Philosophy. Instructor: Dr. Jason Sheley

Ancient Greek Philosophy Instructor: Dr. Jason Sheley Aristotle on the Psyche Aristotle s theory of the soul is notoriously difficult to classify. Scholars have attempted to frame Aristotle s theory as

### To be able to define human nature and psychological egoism. To explain how our views of human nature influence our relationships with other

Velasquez, Philosophy TRACK 1: CHAPTER REVIEW CHAPTER 2: Human Nature 2.1: Why Does Your View of Human Nature Matter? Learning objectives: To be able to define human nature and psychological egoism To

### Baha i Proofs for the Existence of God

Page 1 Baha i Proofs for the Existence of God Ian Kluge to show that belief in God can be rational and logically coherent and is not necessarily a product of uncritical religious dogmatism or ignorance.

### Possibility and Necessity

Possibility and Necessity 1. Modality: Modality is the study of possibility and necessity. These concepts are intuitive enough. Possibility: Some things could have been different. For instance, I could

### By J. Alexander Rutherford. Part one sets the roles, relationships, and begins the discussion with a consideration

An Outline of David Hume s Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion An outline of David Hume s Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion By J. Alexander Rutherford I. Introduction Part one sets the roles, relationships,

### Cosmological Arguments

Cosmological Arguments Arguments that God exists: Review Ontological: the existence of God follows from the very concept of God. exp: Anselm s Ontological Argument This is the only a priori argument for

### Self-Trust and the Reasonableness of Acceptance

Self-Trust and the Reasonableness of Acceptance G. J. Mattey November 15, 2001 Keith Lehrer s theory of knowledge has undergone considerable transformation since the original version he presented in his

What is an argument? PHIL 110 Lecture on Chapter 3 of How to think about weird things An argument is a collection of two or more claims, one of which is the conclusion and the rest of which are the premises.

### William Meehan Essay on Spinoza s psychology.

William Meehan wmeehan@wi.edu Essay on Spinoza s psychology. Baruch (Benedictus) Spinoza is best known in the history of psychology for his theory of the emotions and for being the first modern thinker

### VARIETIES OF SKEPTICISM. Jonathan Vogel Amherst Collge and Harvard University

VARIETIES OF SKEPTICISM Jonathan Vogel Amherst Collge and Harvard University 1. Skepticism as an underdetermination problem Skepticism about the external world is a philosophical problem, but there are

### The Modal Ontological Argument

Mind (1984) Vol. XCIII, 336-350 The Modal Ontological Argument R. KANE We know more today about the second, or so-called 'modal', version of St. Anselm's ontological argument than we did when Charles Hartshorne

### 2 FREE CHOICE The heretical thesis of Hobbes is the orthodox position today. So much is this the case that most of the contemporary literature

Introduction The philosophical controversy about free will and determinism is perennial. Like many perennial controversies, this one involves a tangle of distinct but closely related issues. Thus, the

### Spinoza, Ethics 1 of 85 THE ETHICS. by Benedict de Spinoza (Ethica Ordine Geometrico Demonstrata) Translated from the Latin by R. H. M.

Spinoza, Ethics 1 of 85 THE ETHICS by Benedict de Spinoza (Ethica Ordine Geometrico Demonstrata) Translated from the Latin by R. H. M. Elwes PART I: CONCERNING GOD DEFINITIONS (1) By that which is self-caused

### The Problem of Induction and Popper s Deductivism

The Problem of Induction and Popper s Deductivism Issues: I. Problem of Induction II. Popper s rejection of induction III. Salmon s critique of deductivism 2 I. The problem of induction 1. Inductive vs.

### Previous Final Examinations Philosophy 1

Previous Final Examinations Philosophy 1 For each question, please write a short answer of about one paragraph in length. The answer should be written out in full sentences, not simple phrases. No books,

### FIL 4600/10/20: KANT S CRITIQUE AND CRITICAL METAPHYSICS

FIL 4600/10/20: KANT S CRITIQUE AND CRITICAL METAPHYSICS Autumn 2012, University of Oslo Thursdays, 14 16, Georg Morgenstiernes hus 219, Blindern Toni Kannisto t.t.kannisto@ifikk.uio.no SHORT PLAN 1 23/8:

### Dennett's Reduction of Brentano's Intentionality

Dennett's Reduction of Brentano's Intentionality By BRENT SILBY Department of Philosophy University of Canterbury Copyright (c) Brent Silby 1998 www.def-logic.com/articles Since as far back as the middle

### René Descartes ( ) PSY 3360 / CGS 3325 Historical Perspectives on Psychology Minds and Machines since Descartes

PSY 3360 / CGS 3325 Historical Perspectives on Psychology Minds and Machines since 1600 René Descartes (1596-1650) Dr. Peter Assmann Spring 2018 French mathematician, philosopher, and physiologist Descartes

### John Locke. British Empiricism

John Locke British Empiricism Locke Biographical Notes: Locke is credited as the founder of the British "Common Sense" movement, later known as empiricism - he was also the founder of the modern political

### Faith indeed tells what the senses do not tell, but not the contrary of what they see. It is above them and not contrary to them.

19 Chapter 3 19 CHAPTER 3: Logic Faith indeed tells what the senses do not tell, but not the contrary of what they see. It is above them and not contrary to them. The last proceeding of reason is to recognize

### FALSE DICHOTOMY PRESENTATION

evolution vs. creation FALSE DICHOTOMY PRESENTATION A great resource for demonstrating the false dichotomy of evolution vs. young earth creationism and STARTING CONVERSATION Presentation prepared by Tracy

### Chapter 18 David Hume: Theory of Knowledge

Key Words Chapter 18 David Hume: Theory of Knowledge Empiricism, skepticism, personal identity, necessary connection, causal connection, induction, impressions, ideas. DAVID HUME (1711-76) is one of the

### Fr. Copleston vs. Bertrand Russell: The Famous 1948 BBC Radio Debate on the Existence of God

Fr. Copleston vs. Bertrand Russell: The Famous 1948 BBC Radio Debate on the Existence of God Father Frederick C. Copleston (Jesuit Catholic priest) versus Bertrand Russell (agnostic philosopher) Copleston:

### 5.6.1 Formal validity in categorical deductive arguments

Deductive arguments are commonly used in various kinds of academic writing. In order to be able to perform a critique of deductive arguments, we will need to understand their basic structure. As will be

### Chance, Chaos and the Principle of Sufficient Reason

Chance, Chaos and the Principle of Sufficient Reason Alexander R. Pruss Department of Philosophy Baylor University October 8, 2015 Contents The Principle of Sufficient Reason Against the PSR Chance Fundamental

### Knowledge as Justified True Belief (Plato) March 5, 2014

Knowledge as Justified True Belief (Plato) March 5, 2014 Overview I Overview Setting Learning Puzzle Theory of recollection Example Knowledge True belief Justified true belief Epistemology: Overview Epistemology

### Stephen Mumford Metaphysics: A Very Short Introduction Oxford University Press, Oxford ISBN: \$ pages.

Stephen Mumford Metaphysics: A Very Short Introduction Oxford University Press, Oxford. 2012. ISBN:978-0-19-965712-4. \$11.95 113 pages. Stephen Mumford is Professor of Metaphysics at Nottingham University.

### Mary Eberstadt is a social commentator, a research fellow

115 FAITH AND FAMILY Mary Eberstadt, How the West Really Lost God. West Conshohocken: Templeton Press, 2013. Mary Eberstadt is a social commentator, a research fellow at the Hoover Institution, and a senior

### Paley s Inductive Inference to Design

PHILOSOPHIA CHRISTI VOL. 7, NO. 2 COPYRIGHT 2005 Paley s Inductive Inference to Design A Response to Graham Oppy JONAH N. SCHUPBACH Department of Philosophy Western Michigan University Kalamazoo, Michigan

### general development of both renaissance and post renaissance philosophy up till today. It would

Introduction: The scientific developments of the renaissance were powerful and they stimulate new ways of thought that one can be tempted to disregard any role medieval thinking plays in the general development

### Evidential arguments from evil

International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 48: 1 10, 2000. 2000 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands. 1 Evidential arguments from evil RICHARD OTTE University of California at Santa

### Hume, the New Hume, and Causal Connections Ken Levy Hume Studies Volume XXVI, Number 1 (April, 2000)

Hume, the New Hume, and Causal Connections Ken Levy Hume Studies Volume XXVI, Number 1 (April, 2000) 41-76. Your use of the HUME STUDIES archive indicates your acceptance of HUME STUDIES Terms and Conditions

### Aristotle and Aquinas

Aristotle and Aquinas G. J. Mattey Spring, 2017 / Philosophy 1 Aristotle as Metaphysician Plato s greatest student was Aristotle (384-322 BC). In metaphysics, Aristotle rejected Plato s theory of forms.

### -1 Peter 3:15-16 (NSRV)

Defending Your Faith with Reason and Precision 3. Why does anything at all exist? 4. Why did the universe begin? 5. Why is the universe fine-tuned for life? Sunday, February 24, 2013, 10 to 10:50 am, in

### The Existence of God. See Life s Ultimate Questions, by Ronald Nash Chapters 12 & 13

The Existence of God See Life s Ultimate Questions, by Ronald Nash Chapters 12 & 13 Noetic Structure Definition: A person s beliefs plus the relationships among those beliefs Some beliefs serve as the

### The Principle of Sufficient Reason and Free Will

Stance Volume 3 April 2010 The Principle of Sufficient Reason and Free Will ABSTRACT: I examine Leibniz s version of the Principle of Sufficient Reason with respect to free will, paying particular attention

### Hume s emotivism. Michael Lacewing

Michael Lacewing Hume s emotivism Theories of what morality is fall into two broad families cognitivism and noncognitivism. The distinction is now understood by philosophers to depend on whether one thinks

### Philosophy Epistemology Topic 5 The Justification of Induction 1. Hume s Skeptical Challenge to Induction

Philosophy 5340 - Epistemology Topic 5 The Justification of Induction 1. Hume s Skeptical Challenge to Induction In the section entitled Sceptical Doubts Concerning the Operations of the Understanding