WHERE ARE WE KNOW NOW?
|
|
- Frederica Reeves
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 WHERE ARE WE KNOW NOW? A review of what we have covered in theory of knowledge so far IT ALL STARTS WITH DESCARTES Descartes Project (in the Meditations): To build a system of knowledge. I. A Foundational Theory of Knowledge attempts to build a theory such that : a. Each of the initial premises must be indubitable (no one could doubt it) and incorrigible (not subject to correction). In other words, each premise must be such that were any person any minimally rational and sane person to consider that proposition, he or she would agree that the premise is true. b. Each step of the argument must follow indubitably from the previous premise(s). In Descartes terms, we can simply see by The Light of Reason, that each step must be true given the previous step(s). 1
2 II. Using the method of doubt (discarding every belief that is not certain), he arrives at the Cogito I think, therefore I am and the conclusion that the only things of which he is certain are the contents of his own thoughts the way things seem to him. He concludes that he knows the contents of his mind better than anything else and this includes innate ideas. And now I have brought myself back to where I wanted to be. I now know that physical objects are not really known through sensation or imagination but are grasped by the understanding alone. And from the fact that physical ideas are grasped in virtue of their being understandable (rather than tangible or visible) I infer that I can t know anything more easily and plainly than my mind. p III. Starting with the idea of God, and using only premises that Descartes sees clearly and distinctly to be true, Descartes proves the existence of God. Having proved the existence of God, he says: The whole argument comes down to this: I know that I could not exist with the my present nature (that is, that I could not exist with the idea of God in me) unless there really were a God the very God of whom I have an idea, the thing having all of the perfections that I can t fully comprehend but an somehow reach with thought, the thing that clearly cannot be defective. From this it is obvious that he can t deceive, for the natural light reveals that fraud and deception arise from defect. (p. 123) Hence, because God is no deceiver, the truth of those things I believe to be true is assured. SKEPTICISM IS FALSE. 2
3 For Descartes Knowledge = Justified, True, Belief Justification is NONdefeasible (i.e. our reasons guarantee truth) When we have knowledge, we know that we have knowledge. We can prove that skepticism is false. For Locke.. As an Empiricist, Locke starts with the view that all of our Ideas either come from the senses or they are derived from sensory ideas even the concepts of numbers, of God, or abstract concepts like government, etc. Following Descartes, he starts with the view that we have access to only the content of our ideas thus we have only Certain Knowledge of sensory ideas and of what Locke called relations between Ideas. You also have knowledge of mathematical truths and of the existence of God. 3
4 What about knowledge of the external world? Locke: We can be reasonably certain that there is an external world for two reasons: (a) our perceptions are forced upon us (they occur involuntarily) we can t control the information that comes to us through our senses (b) There is a definite pattern to our perceptions of the external world. Therefore something must be causing theses perceptions and the simplest hypothesis is that there is an external world. But what does this mean for Locke s theory of knowledge? Appiah s Interpretation Knowledge = Justified True Belief But justification need not be certain; our reasons are defeasible. Consequence: we can have justified, true beliefs that no one would want to call them knowledge. 4
5 But what does this mean for Locke s theory of knowledge? Appiah s Interpretation Knowledge = Justified True Belief But justification need not be certain; our reasons are defeasible. Consequence: we can have justified, true beliefs that no one would want to call them knowledge. A Better Locke/Interpretation Knowledge = Justified True Belief We can have Certain Knowledge about only our Ideas and the relations between them. All other knowledge is only probable knowledge : we can know what is probably true. For Descartes Knowledge = Justified, True, Belief Justification is NONdefeasible (i.e. our reasons guarantee truth) When we have knowledge, we know that we have knowledge. We can prove that skepticism is false. For Locke Knowledge = Justified True Belief Our reasons must be NONdefeasible. All Ideas come from the senses. When we have knowledge, we know that we have knowledge We cannot prove that Skepticism is false. We can know are facts about our Ideas (which come from the senses) and the relations between them. Hence, we cannot have real knowledge about the physical world, only probable knowledge. 5
6 Verificationism Skepticism is meaningless! So we don t have to address it. Verificationism Skepticism is meaningless! So we don t have to address it. 1. According to the Logical Positivists, in order for a sentence to have meaning there must be a rule for using that sentence a rule that tells us when we are using the sentence correctly and when we are not using the sentence correctly. 6
7 Verificationism Skepticism is meaningless! So we don t have to address it. 1. According to the Logical Positivists, in order for a sentence to have meaning there must be a rule for using that sentence a rule that tells us when we are using the sentence correctly and when we are not using the sentence correctly. 2. If there were no such rule, we would have no idea how to use the sentence. And hence it would not be a meaningful sentence. Verificationism Skepticism is meaningless! So we don t have to address it. 1. According to the Logical Positivists, in order for a sentence to have meaning there must be a rule for using that sentence a rule that tells us when we are using the sentence correctly and when we are not using the sentence correctly. 2. If there were no such rule, we would have no idea how to use the sentence. And hence it would not be a meaningful sentence. NOTE: the logical positivist does not claim that you, yourself, must be capable of finding out whether any sentence is true or false. Rather, for a sentence to be meaningful, you must be able to conceive of circumstances that would show whether the sentence was true or false. 7
8 Take sentences about history. John Locke was born at Wrington, a village in Somerset, on August 29, What makes it true? Obviously you cannot go back in time, say to August 28, 1632, to the village of Wrington in Somerset, England, and wait to see whether, the next day, John Locke is born. But we do know exactly what would make that sentence true, namely, whether or not, on that day in history, John Locke was or was not born. So the sentence is meaningful (on the Verificationist Theory of Meaning) 8
9 What about sentences that posit skepticism? 1. There is no physical world beyond you: rather you are a brain in a vat controlled by the Evil Scientist, Mary. What about sentences that posit skepticism? 1. There is no physical world beyond you: rather you are a brain in a vat controlled by the Evil Scientist, Mary. What makes this true is if there is scientist Mary, who is currently feeding your brain electrical impulses while floating your brain in a vat of cerebral spinal fluid. Of course, there is no way for YOU to know whether this is true, to somehow check out the hypothesis. But you can well imagine what would have to be the case in order for the sentence to be true. 9
10 2) You may think that you are awake and that there is a physical world beyond you; in fact, right now you are fast asleep dreaming and everything you see before you at present does not exist. 2) You may think that you are awake and that there is a physical world beyond you; in fact, right now you are fast asleep dreaming and everything you see before you at present does not exist. Of course, as in the case of Evil Scientist Mary, there is no way for you to check the truth or falsity of this sentence, because even if you seem to wake up right now, you may still be asleep. But do you know what would make it true? Yes: If your body lies asleep in bed, twitching and moaning, and muttering I m dreaming! Maybe I m dreaming!, and then eventually you wake up and report the strangest dream, etc. then this would make the statement true. 10
11 3. Although you may think you are awake, in fact you have never been awake. You have always been asleep, merely dreaming about a physical world that does not exist, occasionally dreaming that you wake up. 3. Although you may think you are awake, in fact you have never been awake. You have always been asleep, merely dreaming about a physical world that does not exist, occasionally dreaming that you wake up. This is trickier. If there really is no physical world beyond you, what exactly would make this sentence true? We can t imagine you sleeping in bed, because if this sentence is true, then there is no physical you and no physical bed. 11
12 So has Verificationism shown that skeptical worries are meaningless? NO. It is not clear whether (3) is meaningful or not that we can talk sensibly about what it would means to say that we are dreaming ALL THE TIME. But certainly (1) and (2) seem to be meaningful, even on the Verificationist theory of meaning. And we can use either (1) or (2) in order to explain skepticism about the physical world. So it does not seem like the Skeptical Thesis is meaningless. Causal Theories of Knowledge Forget REASONS. Justification is about your causal connections to the world not about what you may know about it! 12
13 Thus far there have been two very large problems with any theory of knowledge. 1) Skepticism About the External World So far, for everyone, including the Logical Positivists: Knowledge = Justified, True Belief. Thus far there have been two very large problems with any theory of knowledge. 1) Skepticism About the External World So far, for everyone, including the Logical Positivists: Knowledge = Justified, True Belief. Justification is understood in terms of having good reasons to believe that something is true. For Descartes (and probably for Locke too), your reasons must guarantee the truth of the proposition, be indefeasible. 13
14 Thus far there have been two very large problems with any theory of knowledge. 1) Skepticism About the External World So far, for everyone, including the Logical Positivists: Knowledge = Justified, True Belief. Justification is understood in terms of having good reasons to believe that something is true. For Descartes (and probably for Locke too), your reasons must guarantee the truth of the proposition, be indefeasible. But you can never have this kind of justification for propositions about the nature of the external world. Thus far there have been two very large problems with any theory of knowledge. 1) Skepticism About the External World So far, for everyone, including the Logical Positivists: Knowledge = Justified, True Belief. Justification is understood in terms of having good reasons to believe that something is true. For Descartes (and probably for Locke too), your reasons must guarantee the truth of the proposition, be indefeasible. But you can never have this kind of justification for propositions about the nature of the external world. So, SKEPTICISM RULES. 14
15 Thus far there have been two very large problems with any theory of knowledge. 1) Skepticism About the External World So far, for everyone, including the Logical Positivists: Knowledge = Justified, True Belief. Justification is understood in terms of having good reasons to believe that something is true. For Descartes (and probably for Locke too), your reasons must guarantee the truth of the proposition, be indefeasible. But you can never have this kind of justification for propositions about the nature of the external world. So, SKEPTICISM RULES. 2) Gettier Problems a) You have good reasons for believing that p is true. b) The statement p is true. c) But your belief is correct only through blind, dumb, luck. So we don t want to say that you KNOW that p is true as the truth of what you believe depends on sheer good luck. Example. Knowing that your Blue Honda Fit is in its parking spot. 15
16 2) Gettier Problems a) You have good reasons for believing that p is true. b) The statement p is true. c) But your belief is correct only through blind, dumb, luck. So we don t want to say that A KNOWS that p is true. Example. Knowing that your blue Honda Fit is in its parking spot. You leave your blue Honda Fit in parking spot #347 and walk away. 2) Gettier Problems a) You have good reasons for believing that p is true. b) The statement p is true. c) But your belief is correct only through blind, dumb, luck. So we don t want to say that A KNOWS that p is true. Example. Knowing that your blue Honda Fit is in its parking spot. You leave your blue Honda Fit in parking spot #347 and walk away. You walk by the parking structure at noon, and see a blue Honda Fit in #
17 2) Gettier Problems a) You have good reasons for believing that p is true. b) The statement p is true. c) But your belief is correct only through blind, dumb, luck. So we don t want to say that A KNOWS that p is true. Example. Knowing that your blue Honda Fit is in its parking spot at 5 p.m.. You leave your blue Honda Fit in parking spot #347 and walk away. You walk by the parking structure at noon, and see a blue Honda Fit in #347. At 5:00 p.m. when you leave work, you know that your blue Honda Fit is in its spot and you walk to your car secure in your knowledge (produced by in your superior epistemic system/powers). However 9:05 a.m. A thief disguised as an SFU security guard, hotwires your car. She drives your Fit to the nearest Bank of Montreal, parks it in a NO PARKING zone, and goes in to rob the bank. She leaves the car running outside a 9:32. 17
18 However 9:05 a.m. A thief disguised as an SFU security guard, hotwires your car. She drives your Fit to the nearest Bank of Montreal, parks it in a NO PARKING zone, and goes in to rob the bank. She leaves the car running outside a 9:32. 9:32 a.m. A passing SFU business student sees an idling Blue Fit. He is desperate to get to city hall to purchase a Small Business License before they close for lunch. He hops in and drives away. However 9:05 a.m. A thief disguised as an SFU security guard, hotwires your car. She drives your Fit to the nearest Bank of Montreal, parks it in a NO PARKING zone, and goes in to rob the bank. She leaves the car running outside a 9:32. 9:32 a.m. A passing SFU business student sees an idling Blue Fit. He is desperate to get to city hall to purchase a Small Business License before they close for lunch. He hops in and drives away. 11:25 a.m. Meanwhile, back at SFU, a desperate PHIL 100 student, running late for his tutorial at 11:30 a.m. is cruising the parking structure, looking for an empty spot. He spys an empty spot and leaves the car there. That spot is #
19 However 9:05 a.m. A thief disguised as an SFU security guard, hotwires your car. She drives your Fit to the nearest Bank of Montreal, parks it in a NO PARKING zone, and goes in to rob the bank. She leaves the car running outside a 9:32. 9:32 a.m. A passing SFU business student sees an idling Blue Fit. He is desperate to get to city hall to purchase a Small Business License before they close for lunch. He hops in and drives away. 11:25 a.m. Meanwhile, back at SFU, a desperate PHIL 100 student, running late for his tutorial at 11:30 a.m. is cruising the parking structure, looking for an empty spot. He spys an empty spot and leaves the car there. That spot is # :00 NOON. You walk by and see a blue Honda fit in #347. However 9:05 a.m. A thief disguised as an SFU security guard, hotwires your car. She drives your Fit to the nearest Bank of Montreal, parks it in a NO PARKING zone, and goes in to rob the bank. She leaves the car running outside a 9:32. 9:32 a.m. A passing SFU business student sees an idling Blue Fit. He is desperate to get to city hall to purchase a Small Business License before they close for lunch. He hops in and drives away. 11:25 a.m. Meanwhile, back at SFU, a desperate PHIL 100 student, running late for his tutorial at 11:30 a.m. is cruising the parking structure, looking for an empty spot. He spys an empty spot and leaves the car there. That spot is # :00 NOON. You walk by and see a blue Honda fit in # :30 p.m. The PHIL 100 student leaves his tutorial and drives away in his blue Honda fit. 19
20 However 9:05 a.m. A thief disguised as an SFU security guard, hotwires your car. She drives your Fit to the nearest Bank of Montreal, parks it in a NO PARKING zone, and goes in to rob the bank. She leaves the car running outside a 9:32. 9:32 a.m. A passing SFU business student sees an idling Blue Fit. He is desperate to get to city hall to purchase a Small Business License before they close for lunch. He hops in and drives away. 11:25 a.m. Meanwhile, back at SFU, a desperate PHIL 100 student, running late for his tutorial at 11:30 a.m. is cruising the parking structure, looking for an empty spot. He spys an empty spot and leaves the car there. That spot is # :00 NOON. You walk by and see a blue Honda fit in # :30 p.m. The PHIL 100 student leaves his tutorial and drives away in his blue Honda fit. 4:25 p.m. The SFU business student arrives at SFU for his 4:30 class, and drives desperately around the parking structure. He finds an empty spot. #347. He parks the car and leaves. However 9:05 a.m. A thief disguised as an SFU security guard, hotwires your car. She drives your Fit to the nearest Bank of Montreal, parks it in a NO PARKING zone, and goes in to rob the bank. She leaves the car running outside a 9:32. 9:32 a.m. A passing SFU business student sees an idling Blue Fit. He is desperate to get to city hall to purchase a Small Business License before they close for lunch. He hops in and drives away. 11:25 a.m. Meanwhile, back at SFU, a desperate PHIL 100 student, running late for his tutorial at 11:30 a.m. is cruising the parking structure, looking for an empty spot. He spys an empty spot and leaves the car there. That spot is # :00 NOON. You walk by and see a blue Honda fit in # :30 p.m. The PHIL 100 student leaves his tutorial and drives away in his blue Honda fit. 4:25 p.m. The SFU business student arrives at SFU for his 4:30 class, and drives desperately around the parking structure. He finds an empty spot. #347. He parks the car and leaves. 5:00 p.m. You walk to your car secure in the knowledge that your blue Fit is in #
21 Normally leaving your car in the parking lot and seeing a car of the same description in that exact spot 3 hours later, is good evidence that your car is where you left it. Normally, you infer that a car that looks exactly like your car and is parked in the same place IS your car. But here, the inferences is incorrect. Hence you do no know that your car is in your parking spot. In light of this kind of problem (what I ll call the dumb luck problem) and the general worry of skepticism Some philosophers have wondered whether justification is NOT just a matter of what reasons a person has or what a person knows, but how your beliefs connect to the world. 21
22 On a causal account of knowledge: a. You must believe that S b. S must be true c. Your belief in S must be caused in the appropriate way. In the case of the Blue Fit, your belief that your car was in the parking lot was caused by you seeing a Blue Honda Fit. Normally, this would be enough to justify your belief that your car was sitting in its parking place. But THAT Honda Fit was not YOUR Honda fit. But your belief was not caused in the right kind of way. Thus on the causal account you do NOT know that your car is in the parking garage. Things to NOTE about Causal Accounts. 1. Causal accounts called externalist accounts of knowledge because whether or not a belief counts as knowledge depends upon the way the world is (its causal relation to your belief) NOT upon your reasons for believing what you do. That is, it depends upon events that are EXTERNAL to you. 22
23 Things to NOTE about Causal Accounts 1. Causal accounts called externalist accounts of knowledge because whether or not a belief counts as knowledge depends upon the way the world is (its causal relation to your belief) NOT upon your reasons for believing what you do. That is, it depends upon events that are EXTERNAL to you. 2. Because knowledge depends upon facts that are external to you, you may not know when you have knowledge and when you do not. You do NOT know that know (or don t know) in all cases. 3. There is no such thing as a foundational causal account of knowledge, because justification (on this account) does not depend upon what you know. Thus we do not need Cartesian indubitable axioms from which to reason. 23
Descartes Method of Doubt
Descartes Method of Doubt Philosophy 100 Lecture 9 PUTTING IT TOGETHER. Descartes Idea 1. The New Science. What science is about is describing the nature and interaction of the ultimate constituents of
More informationSo, among your current vast store of indubitable beliefs are the following: It seems to me that I am in Philosophy 100.
From last time By following the method of doubt by discarding every belief that could possibly be false Descartes has eliminated every statement about the nature of the physical world. While that eliminates
More informationThe Problem of the External World
The Problem of the External World External World Skepticism Consider this painting by Rene Magritte: Is there a tree outside? External World Skepticism Many people have thought that humans are like this
More informationIntroduction to Philosophy
Introduction to Philosophy Philosophy 110W Fall 2014 Russell Marcus Class #3 - Illusion Descartes, from Meditations on First Philosophy Marcus, Introduction to Philosophy, Fall 2014 Slide 1 Business P
More informationClass #3 - Illusion Descartes, from Meditations on First Philosophy Descartes, The Story of the Wax Descartes, The Story of the Sun
Philosophy 110W: Introduction to Philosophy Fall 2014 Hamilton College Russell Marcus Class #3 - Illusion Descartes, from Meditations on First Philosophy Descartes, The Story of the Wax Descartes, The
More informationFrom Descartes to Locke. Consciousness Knowledge Science Reality
From Descartes to Locke Consciousness Knowledge Science Reality Brains in Vats What is the point? The point of the brain in a vat story is not to convince us that we might actually be brains in vats, But
More informationDo 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
More informationLogic, Truth & Epistemology. Ross Arnold, Summer 2014 Lakeside institute of Theology
Logic, Truth & Epistemology Ross Arnold, Summer 2014 Lakeside institute of Theology Philosophical Theology 1 (TH5) Aug. 15 Intro to Philosophical Theology; Logic Aug. 22 Truth & Epistemology Aug. 29 Metaphysics
More informationSo how does Descartes doubt everything?
Descartes and the First Two Meditations 9/15 I. Descartes Motivations - Descartes begins the meditations by mentioning that he was taught and accepted many falsehoods in his youth, and that his beliefs
More informationFrom Brains in Vats.
From Brains in Vats. To God; To a Evil Genius; And even to Myself; What can know? What can we doubt? The search for certainty René Descartes Meditations on First Philosophy In which are demonstrated the
More informationEpistemology. Theory of Knowledge
Epistemology Theory of Knowledge Epistemological Questions What is knowledge? What is the structure of knowledge? What particular things can I know? What particular things do I know? Do I know x? What
More informationPhilosophy 203 History of Modern Western Philosophy. Russell Marcus Hamilton College Spring 2012
Philosophy 203 History of Modern Western Philosophy Russell Marcus Hamilton College Spring 2012 Class 2 - Meditation One Marcus, Modern Philosophy, Spring 2012, Slide 1 Business P My name is Russell P
More informationIntroduction to Philosophy
Introduction to Philosophy Philosophy 110W Spring 2013 Russell Marcus Class #4 - Sense Experience Descartes and Locke Marcus, Introduction to Philosophy, Slide 1 Business P Writing Center P Presentation
More informationFrom Brains in Vats.
From Brains in Vats. To God; And even to Myself, To a Malicious Demon; But, with I am, I exist (or Cogito ergo sum, i.e., I think therefore I am ), we have found the ultimate foundation. The place where
More informationRené Descartes ( )
René Descartes (1596-1650) René Descartes René Descartes Method of doubt René Descartes Method of doubt Things you believed that you now know to be false? René Descartes Method of doubt Skeptical arguments
More informationThe Rejection of Skepticism
1 The Rejection of Skepticism Abstract There is a widespread belief among contemporary philosophers that skeptical hypotheses such as that we are dreaming, or victims of an evil demon, or brains in a vat
More informationCARTESIANISM, NEO-REIDIANISM, AND THE A PRIORI: REPLY TO PUST
CARTESIANISM, NEO-REIDIANISM, AND THE A PRIORI: REPLY TO PUST Gregory STOUTENBURG ABSTRACT: Joel Pust has recently challenged the Thomas Reid-inspired argument against the reliability of the a priori defended
More informationPhilosophy 203 History of Modern Western Philosophy. Russell Marcus Hamilton College Spring 2010
Philosophy 203 History of Modern Western Philosophy Russell Marcus Hamilton College Spring 2010 Class 3 - Meditations Two and Three too much material, but we ll do what we can Marcus, Modern Philosophy,
More informationPhilosophy 203 History of Modern Western Philosophy. Russell Marcus Hamilton College Spring 2016
Philosophy 203 History of Modern Western Philosophy Russell Marcus Hamilton College Spring 2016 Class #7 Finishing the Meditations Marcus, Modern Philosophy, Slide 1 Business # Today An exercise with your
More informationDirect Realism and the Brain-in-a-Vat Argument by Michael Huemer (2000)
Direct Realism and the Brain-in-a-Vat Argument by Michael Huemer (2000) One of the advantages traditionally claimed for direct realist theories of perception over indirect realist theories is that the
More informationEPISTEMOLOGY for DUMMIES
EPISTEMOLOGY for DUMMIES Cary Cook 2008 Epistemology doesn t help us know much more than we would have known if we had never heard of it. But it does force us to admit that we don t know some of the things
More informationNew Chapter: Epistemology: The Theory and Nature of Knowledge
Intro to Philosophy Phil 110 Lecture 12: 2-15 Daniel Kelly I. Mechanics A. Upcoming Readings 1. Today we ll discuss a. Descartes, Meditations on First Philosophy (full.pdf) 2. Next week a. Locke, An Essay
More informationCartesian Rationalism
Cartesian Rationalism René Descartes 1596-1650 Reason tells me to trust my senses Descartes had the disturbing experience of finding out that everything he learned at school was wrong! From 1604-1612 he
More informationCommon sense dictates that we can know external reality exists and that it is generally correctly perceived via our five senses
Common sense dictates that we can know external reality exists and that it is generally correctly perceived via our five senses Mind Mind Body Mind Body [According to this view] the union [of body and
More informationMeditation 1: On what can be doubted
Meditation 1: On what can be doubted Descartes begins the First Meditation by noting that there are many things he once believed to be true that he has later learned were not. This leads him to worry which
More informationFoundationalism Vs. Skepticism: The Greater Philosophical Ideology
1. Introduction Ryan C. Smith Philosophy 125W- Final Paper April 24, 2010 Foundationalism Vs. Skepticism: The Greater Philosophical Ideology Throughout this paper, the goal will be to accomplish three
More informationDescartes 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
More informationYou keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. an analysis of Descartes Evil Genius conceivability argument
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. an analysis of Descartes Evil Genius conceivability argument by Forrest Cameranesi In his Meditations, Descartes lays out an argument
More information! Jumping ahead 2000 years:! Consider the theory of the self.! What am I? What certain knowledge do I have?! Key figure: René Descartes.
! Jumping ahead 2000 years:! Consider the theory of the self.! What am I? What certain knowledge do I have?! What is the relation between that knowledge and that given in the sciences?! Key figure: René
More informationCartesian Rationalism
Cartesian Rationalism René Descartes 1596-1650 Reason tells me to trust my senses Descartes had the disturbing experience of finding out that everything he learned at school was wrong! From 1604-1612 he
More informationIntro to Philosophy. Review for Exam 2
Intro to Philosophy Review for Exam 2 Epistemology Theory of Knowledge What is knowledge? What is the structure of knowledge? What particular things can I know? What particular things do I know? Do I know
More informationIn this lecture I am going to introduce you to the methodology of philosophy logic and argument
In this lecture I am going to introduce you to the methodology of philosophy logic and argument 2 We ll do this by analysing and evaluating a very famous argument Descartes Cogito Ergo Sum 3 René Descartes
More informationTheories of epistemic justification can be divided into two groups: internalist and
1 Internalism and externalism about justification Theories of epistemic justification can be divided into two groups: internalist and externalist. Internalist theories of justification say that whatever
More informationFrom the fact that I cannot think of God except as existing, it follows that existence is inseparable from God, and hence that he really exists.
FIFTH MEDITATION The essence of material things, and the existence of God considered a second time We have seen that Descartes carefully distinguishes questions about a thing s existence from questions
More informationThis handout follows the handout on The nature of the sceptic s challenge. You should read that handout first.
Michael Lacewing Three responses to scepticism This handout follows the handout on The nature of the sceptic s challenge. You should read that handout first. MITIGATED SCEPTICISM The term mitigated scepticism
More information1/8. Descartes 3: Proofs of the Existence of God
1/8 Descartes 3: Proofs of the Existence of God Descartes opens the Third Meditation by reminding himself that nothing that is purely sensory is reliable. The one thing that is certain is the cogito. He
More informationGeneral Philosophy. Dr Peter Millican,, Hertford College. Lecture 4: Two Cartesian Topics
General Philosophy Dr Peter Millican,, Hertford College Lecture 4: Two Cartesian Topics Scepticism, and the Mind 2 Last Time we looked at scepticism about INDUCTION. This Lecture will move on to SCEPTICISM
More informationThe British Empiricism
The British Empiricism Locke, Berkeley and Hume copyleft: nicolazuin.2018 nowxhere.wordpress.com The terrible heritage of Descartes: Skepticism, Empiricism, Rationalism The problem originates from the
More informationNew Chapter: Epistemology: The Theory and Nature of Knowledge
Intro to Philosophy Phil 110 Lecture 11: 2-13 Daniel Kelly I. Mechanics A. Upcoming Readings 1. Today we ll discuss a. Descartes, Meditations on First Philosophy (full.pdf) 2. Next time a. Descartes, Meditations
More informationHOBBES S DECEIVING GOD: THE CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN THOMAS HOBBES AND RENE DESCARTES. Gabriela Gorescu. Thesis Prepared for the Degree of
HOBBES S DECEIVING GOD: THE CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN THOMAS HOBBES AND RENE DESCARTES Gabriela Gorescu Thesis Prepared for the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS August 2015 APPROVED: Richard
More informationNational Quali cations SPECIMEN ONLY. Date of birth Scottish candidate number
N5FOR OFFICIAL USE S854/75/01 National Quali cations SPECIMEN ONLY Mark Philosophy Date Not applicable Duration 2 hours 20 minutes *S8547501* Fill in these boxes and read what is printed below. Full name
More informationIs there a distinction between a priori and a posteriori
Lingnan University Digital Commons @ Lingnan University Theses & Dissertations Department of Philosophy 2014 Is there a distinction between a priori and a posteriori Hiu Man CHAN Follow this and additional
More informationFrom Descartes to Locke. Sense Perception And The External World
From Descartes to Locke Sense Perception And The External World Descartes Third Meditation Descartes aim in the third Meditation is to demonstrate the existence of God, using only what (after Med. s 1
More informationJohn Locke. An Essay Concerning Human Understanding
John Locke An Essay Concerning Human Understanding From Rationalism to Empiricism Empiricism vs. Rationalism Empiricism: All knowledge ultimately rests upon sense experience. All justification (our reasons
More informationCan A Priori Justified Belief Be Extended Through Deduction? It is often assumed that if one deduces some proposition p from some premises
Can A Priori Justified Belief Be Extended Through Deduction? Introduction It is often assumed that if one deduces some proposition p from some premises which one knows a priori, in a series of individually
More informationSQUARING THE CARTESIAN CIRCLE
SQUARING THE CARTESIAN CIRCLE Charles Hucnemann University of Illinois at Chicago The lasting objection against Descartes's Meditations seems to be that his reasoning is circular. On the one hand, he uses
More informationEmpiricism. HZT4U1 - Mr. Wittmann - Unit 3 - Lecture 3
Empiricism HZT4U1 - Mr. Wittmann - Unit 3 - Lecture 3 What can give us more sure knowledge than our senses? How else can we distinguish between the true & the false? -Lucretius The Dream by Henri Rousseau
More informationMagic, semantics, and Putnam s vat brains
Published in Studies in History and Philosophy of Science (2004) 35: 227 236. doi:10.1016/j.shpsc.2004.03.007 mark.sprevak@ed.ac.uk Magic, semantics, and Putnam s vat brains Mark Sprevak University of
More informationBoghossian & 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
More informationIntroduction to Philosophy. Spring 2017
Introduction to Philosophy Spring 2017 Elements of The Matrix The Matrix obviously has a lot of interesting parallels, themes, philosophical points, etc. For this class, the most interesting are the religious
More informationVerificationism. PHIL September 27, 2011
Verificationism PHIL 83104 September 27, 2011 1. The critique of metaphysics... 1 2. Observation statements... 2 3. In principle verifiability... 3 4. Strong verifiability... 3 4.1. Conclusive verifiability
More informationGeorge Berkeley. The Principles of Human Knowledge. Review
George Berkeley The Principles of Human Knowledge Review To be is to be perceived Obvious to the Mind all those bodies which compose the earth have no subsistence without a mind, their being is to be perceived
More informationMohammad Reza Vaez Shahrestani. University of Bonn
Philosophy Study, November 2017, Vol. 7, No. 11, 595-600 doi: 10.17265/2159-5313/2017.11.002 D DAVID PUBLISHING Defending Davidson s Anti-skepticism Argument: A Reply to Otavio Bueno Mohammad Reza Vaez
More informationWhat is knowledge? How do good beliefs get made?
What is knowledge? How do good beliefs get made? We are users of our cognitive systems Our cognitive (belief-producing) systems (e.g. perception, memory and inference) largely run automatically. We find
More informationJohn 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
More informationPhilosophy 427 Intuitions and Philosophy. Russell Marcus Hamilton College Fall 2011
Philosophy 427 Intuitions and Philosophy Russell Marcus Hamilton College Fall 2011 Class 4 The Myth of the Given Marcus, Intuitions and Philosophy, Fall 2011, Slide 1 Atomism and Analysis P Wittgenstein
More informationWHAT 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.
More informationPHILOSOPHY OF KNOWLEDGE & REALITY W E E K 7 : E P I S T E M O L O G Y - K A N T
PHILOSOPHY OF KNOWLEDGE & REALITY W E E K 7 : E P I S T E M O L O G Y - K A N T AGENDA 1. Review of Epistemology 2. Kant Kant s Compromise Kant s Copernican Revolution 3. The Nature of Truth REVIEW: THREE
More informationClass #5-6: Modern Rationalism Sample Introductory Material from Marcus and McEvoy, An Historical Introduction to the Philosophy of Mathematics
Philosophy 405: Knowledge, Truth and Mathematics Spring 2014 Hamilton College Russell Marcus Class #5-6: Modern Rationalism Sample Introductory Material from Marcus and McEvoy, An Historical Introduction
More informationPHILOSOPHY OF KNOWLEDGE & REALITY W E E K 7 : E P I S T E M O L O G Y - K A N T
PHILOSOPHY OF KNOWLEDGE & REALITY W E E K 7 : E P I S T E M O L O G Y - K A N T AGENDA 1. Review of Epistemology 2. Kant Kant s Compromise Kant s Copernican Revolution 3. The Nature of Truth KNOWLEDGE:
More informationTHE SEMANTIC REALISM OF STROUD S RESPONSE TO AUSTIN S ARGUMENT AGAINST SCEPTICISM
SKÉPSIS, ISSN 1981-4194, ANO VII, Nº 14, 2016, p. 33-39. THE SEMANTIC REALISM OF STROUD S RESPONSE TO AUSTIN S ARGUMENT AGAINST SCEPTICISM ALEXANDRE N. MACHADO Universidade Federal do Paraná (UFPR) Email:
More informationthe aim is to specify the structure of the world in the form of certain basic truths from which all truths can be derived. (xviii)
PHIL 5983: Naturalness and Fundamentality Seminar Prof. Funkhouser Spring 2017 Week 8: Chalmers, Constructing the World Notes (Introduction, Chapters 1-2) Introduction * We are introduced to the ideas
More informationSUPPOSITIONAL REASONING AND PERCEPTUAL JUSTIFICATION
SUPPOSITIONAL REASONING AND PERCEPTUAL JUSTIFICATION Stewart COHEN ABSTRACT: James Van Cleve raises some objections to my attempt to solve the bootstrapping problem for what I call basic justification
More informationIntro to Philosophy. Instructor: Jason Sheley
Intro to Philosophy Instructor: Jason Sheley Quiz: True or False? 1) According to Glaucon, if given the Ring, the unjust and just person will behave the same way. 2) Socrates assumes that a person in the
More informationThe purpose of this paper is to introduce the problem of skepticism as the
Hinge Conditions: An Argument Against Skepticism by Blake Barbour I. Introduction The purpose of this paper is to introduce the problem of skepticism as the Transmissibility Argument represents it and
More informationMind and Body. Is mental really material?"
Mind and Body Is mental really material?" René Descartes (1596 1650) v 17th c. French philosopher and mathematician v Creator of the Cartesian co-ordinate system, and coinventor of algebra v Wrote Meditations
More informationSkepticism is True. Abraham Meidan
Skepticism is True Abraham Meidan Skepticism is True Copyright 2004 Abraham Meidan All rights reserved. Universal Publishers Boca Raton, Florida USA 2004 ISBN: 1-58112-504-6 www.universal-publishers.com
More informationKant Lecture 4 Review Synthetic a priori knowledge
Kant Lecture 4 Review Synthetic a priori knowledge Statements involving necessity or strict universality could never be known on the basis of sense experience, and are thus known (if known at all) a priori.
More informationNotes on Bertrand Russell s The Problems of Philosophy (Hackett 1990 reprint of the 1912 Oxford edition, Chapters XII, XIII, XIV, )
Notes on Bertrand Russell s The Problems of Philosophy (Hackett 1990 reprint of the 1912 Oxford edition, Chapters XII, XIII, XIV, 119-152) Chapter XII Truth and Falsehood [pp. 119-130] Russell begins here
More information1/8. Reid on Common Sense
1/8 Reid on Common Sense Thomas Reid s work An Inquiry into the Human Mind on the Principles of Common Sense is self-consciously written in opposition to a lot of the principles that animated early modern
More informationMcDowell and the New Evil Genius
1 McDowell and the New Evil Genius Ram Neta and Duncan Pritchard 0. Many epistemologists both internalists and externalists regard the New Evil Genius Problem (Lehrer & Cohen 1983) as constituting an important
More informationGREAT PHILOSOPHERS: Thomas Reid ( ) Peter West 25/09/18
GREAT PHILOSOPHERS: Thomas Reid (1710-1796) Peter West 25/09/18 Some context Aristotle (384-322 BCE) Lucretius (c. 99-55 BCE) Thomas Reid (1710-1796 AD) 400 BCE 0 Much of (Western) scholastic philosophy
More informationRENÉ DESCARTES
RENÉ DESCARTES 1596-1650 It is now some years since I detected how many were the false beliefs that I had from my earliest youth admitted as true, [I]f I am able to find in each one some reason to doubt,
More informationExperience and Foundationalism in Audi s The Architecture of Reason
Philosophy and Phenomenological Research Vol. LXVII, No. 1, July 2003 Experience and Foundationalism in Audi s The Architecture of Reason WALTER SINNOTT-ARMSTRONG Dartmouth College Robert Audi s The Architecture
More informationEpistemology. Diogenes: Master Cynic. The Ancient Greek Skeptics 4/6/2011. But is it really possible to claim knowledge of anything?
Epistemology a branch of philosophy that investigates the origin, nature, methods, and limits of human knowledge (Dictionary.com v 1.1). Epistemology attempts to answer the question how do we know what
More informationPhilo 101 Online Hunter College Fall 2017
Philo 101 Online Hunter College Fall 2017 Daniel W. Harris 1 The Structure of Our Knowledge One of the central questions of epistemology deals with the issue of how our knowledge is structured. To ask
More informationPractical Skepticism or:
Practical Skepticism or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love to Doubt Patrick Tierney Spring 2014 1 P a g e Patrick Tierney I. Introduction 1 The Problem of Skepticism There are many things in our
More informationLecture 38 CARTESIAN THEORY OF MIND REVISITED Overview. Key words: Cartesian Mind, Thought, Understanding, Computationality, and Noncomputationality.
Lecture 38 CARTESIAN THEORY OF MIND REVISITED Overview Descartes is one of the classical founders of non-computational theories of mind. In this paper my main argument is to show how Cartesian mind is
More informationDefinitions of Gods of Descartes and Locke
Assignment of Introduction to Philosophy Definitions of Gods of Descartes and Locke June 7, 2015 Kenzo Fujisue 1. Introduction Through lectures of Introduction to Philosophy, I studied that Christianity
More informationLecture 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
More informationIII Knowledge is true belief based on argument. Plato, Theaetetus, 201 c-d Is Justified True Belief Knowledge? Edmund Gettier
III Knowledge is true belief based on argument. Plato, Theaetetus, 201 c-d Is Justified True Belief Knowledge? Edmund Gettier In Theaetetus Plato introduced the definition of knowledge which is often translated
More informationThomas Reid on ideas and our knowledge of the external world
Thomas Reid on ideas and our knowledge of the external world inquiry into the human mind and the principles of commonsense, chapter 5, sections 7 and 8 Prof. Mark Steen Phil 112 Spring 2013 Commonsense
More informationPHILOSOPHICAL RAMIFICATIONS: THEORY, EXPERIMENT, & EMPIRICAL TRUTH
PHILOSOPHICAL RAMIFICATIONS: THEORY, EXPERIMENT, & EMPIRICAL TRUTH PCES 3.42 Even before Newton published his revolutionary work, philosophers had already been trying to come to grips with the questions
More informationSUMMARIES AND TEST QUESTIONS UNIT 1
SUMMARIES AND TEST QUESTIONS UNIT 1 Textbook: Louis P. Pojman, Editor. Philosophy: The quest for truth. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006. ISBN-10: 0199697310; ISBN-13: 9780199697311 (6th Edition)
More informationPhilosophy 203 History of Modern Western Philosophy. Russell Marcus Hamilton College Spring 2015
Philosophy 203 History of Modern Western Philosophy Russell Marcus Hamilton College Spring 2015 Class #2 - Meditation One Marcus, Modern Philosophy, Slide 1 Business P Panel presentation sign-ups Send
More informationNaturalized Epistemology. 1. What is naturalized Epistemology? Quine PY4613
Naturalized Epistemology Quine PY4613 1. What is naturalized Epistemology? a. How is it motivated? b. What are its doctrines? c. Naturalized Epistemology in the context of Quine s philosophy 2. Naturalized
More informationMEDITATIONS ON FIRST PHILOSOPHY. Rene Descartes. in which are demonstrated the existence of God and the distinction between
MEDITATIONS ON FIRST PHILOSOPHY Rene Descartes in which are demonstrated the existence of God and the distinction between the human soul and the body FIRST MEDITATION What can be called into doubt [1]
More informationClass 4 - The Myth of the Given
2 3 Philosophy 2 3 : Intuitions and Philosophy Fall 2011 Hamilton College Russell Marcus Class 4 - The Myth of the Given I. Atomism and Analysis In our last class, on logical empiricism, we saw that Wittgenstein
More informationPhilosophy 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
More informationThink 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
More informationSkepticism and Internalism
Skepticism and Internalism John Greco Abstract: This paper explores a familiar skeptical problematic and considers some strategies for responding to it. Section 1 reconstructs and disambiguates the skeptical
More informationThe Externalist and the Structuralist Responses To Skepticism. David Chalmers
The Externalist and the Structuralist Responses To Skepticism David Chalmers Overview In Reason, Truth, and History, Hilary Putnam mounts an externalist response to skepticism. In The Matrix as Metaphysics
More informationIntroductory Kant Seminar Lecture
Introductory Kant Seminar Lecture Intentionality It is not unusual to begin a discussion of Kant with a brief review of some history of philosophy. What is perhaps less usual is to start with a review
More informationClass 18 - Against Abstract Ideas Berkeley s Principles, Introduction, (AW ); (handout) Three Dialogues, Second Dialogue (AW )
Philosophy 203: History of Modern Western Philosophy Spring 2012 Hamilton College Russell Marcus Class 18 - Against Abstract Ideas Berkeley s Principles, Introduction, (AW 438-446); 86-100 (handout) Three
More informationIntroduction to Philosophy. Instructor: Jason Sheley
Introduction to Philosophy Instructor: Jason Sheley Quiz True or False? 1. Descartes believes that the possibility of veridical dreams undermines our faith in our senses. 2. Descartes believes that the
More informationPHIL 3140: Epistemology
PHIL 3140: Epistemology 0.5 credit. Fundamental issues concerning the relation between evidence, rationality, and knowledge. Topics may include: skepticism, the nature of belief, the structure of justification,
More informationA. Aristotle D. Descartes B. Plato E. Hume
A. Aristotle D. Kant B. Plato E. Mill C. Confucius 1....pleasure, and freedom from pain, are the only things desirable as ends. 2. Courage is not only the knowledge of the hopeful and the fearful, but
More informationRationalism of a moderate variety has recently enjoyed the renewed interest of
EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE FOR RATIONALISM? [PENULTIMATE DRAFT] Joel Pust University of Delaware 1. Introduction Rationalism of a moderate variety has recently enjoyed the renewed interest of epistemologists.
More informationFrom the Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy
From the Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy Epistemology Peter D. Klein Philosophical Concept Epistemology is one of the core areas of philosophy. It is concerned with the nature, sources and limits
More informationAyer on the criterion of verifiability
Ayer on the criterion of verifiability November 19, 2004 1 The critique of metaphysics............................. 1 2 Observation statements............................... 2 3 In principle verifiability...............................
More information