PHIL / PSYC 351. Thinking and Reasoning

Similar documents
CAUSATION 1 THE BASICS OF CAUSATION

Critical Thinking 5.7 Validity in inductive, conductive, and abductive arguments

Introduction. I. Proof of the Minor Premise ( All reality is completely intelligible )

Chapter 18 David Hume: Theory of Knowledge

Treatise I,iii,14: Hume offers an account of all five causes: matter, form, efficient, exemplary, and final cause.

Jonathan Livengood. Academic Appointments. Education. Research Interests. Department of Philosophy. University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign

Department of Philosophy

What does it mean if we assume the world is in principle intelligible?

Phil 1103 Review. Also: Scientific realism vs. anti-realism Can philosophers criticise science?

CONTENTS A SYSTEM OF LOGIC

Predicate logic. Miguel Palomino Dpto. Sistemas Informáticos y Computación (UCM) Madrid Spain

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

Van Fraassen: Arguments concerning scientific realism

LOGIC LECTURE #3: DEDUCTION AND INDUCTION. Source: A Concise Introduction to Logic, 11 th Ed. (Patrick Hurley, 2012)

Hume. Hume the Empiricist. Judgments about the World. Impressions as Content of the Mind. The Problem of Induction & Knowledge of the External World

Problems of Philosophy

Pictures, Proofs, and Mathematical Practice : Reply to James Robert Brown

Review Tutorial (A Whirlwind Tour of Metaphysics, Epistemology and Philosophy of Religion)

Philosophical Arguments

HOW TO ANALYZE AN ARGUMENT

Learning from Mistakes Karl Popper and Thomas Kuhn

Christ-Centered Critical Thinking. Lesson 6: Evaluating Thinking

Projection in Hume. P J E Kail. St. Peter s College, Oxford.

Van Fraassen: Arguments Concerning Scientific Realism

20 TH CENTURY PHILOSOPHY [PHIL ], SPRING 2017

Kant & Transcendental Idealism

This handout follows the handout on Hume on causation. You should read that handout first.

Establishing premises

BOOK REVIEWS. 259 H. C. STEVENS. University of Chicago.

Logic: The Science that Evaluates Arguments

Discussion Notes for Bayesian Reasoning

1. Introduction Formal deductive logic Overview

4.00 cr. Phone: (541) SYLLABUS*

Reductio ad Absurdum, Modulation, and Logical Forms. Miguel López-Astorga 1

Lecture One: The Aspiration for a Natural Science of the Social

1/6. The Second Analogy (2)

On the Myth of Metaphysical Neutrality IACR Conference Cheryl Frank Memorial Award Lecture (Draft) July 2015

The Kripkenstein Paradox and the Private World. In his paper, Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Languages, Kripke expands upon a conclusion

There are two common forms of deductively valid conditional argument: modus ponens and modus tollens.

Philosophy 12 Study Guide #4 Ch. 2, Sections IV.iii VI

CONTENTS. INTRODUCTORY Chapter I ETHICAL NEUTRALITY AND PRAGMATISM

Portfolio Project. Phil 251A Logic Fall Due: Friday, December 7

PLEASE DO NOT WRITE ON THIS QUIZ

The Critique (analyzing an essay s argument)

Philosophy of Economics and Politics

Lecture 25 Hume on Causation

Argument and Persuasion. Stating Opinions and Proposals

A Quick Review of the Scientific Method Transcript

R. G. Collingwood, An Essay on Metaphysics, Clarendon Press, Oxford p : the term cause has at least three different senses:

Ilija Barukčić Causality. New Statistical Methods. ISBN X Discussion with the reader.

- We might, now, wonder whether the resulting concept of justification is sufficiently strong. According to BonJour, apparent rational insight is

Knowledge and Reality

1/7. The Postulates of Empirical Thought

INTERMEDIATE LOGIC Glossary of key terms

Do we have knowledge of the external world?

DNA, Information, and the Signature in the Cell

Reading and Evaluating Arguments

Of Skepticism with Regard to the Senses. David Hume

A R G U M E N T S I N A C T I O N

ON CAUSAL AND CONSTRUCTIVE MODELLING OF BELIEF CHANGE

Certainty, Necessity, and Knowledge in Hume s Treatise

Kazuhisa Todayama (Graduate School of Information Science, Nagoya University, Japan)

Chapter 2 Science as a Way of Knowing: Critical Thinking about the Environment

From the Greek Oikos = House Ology = study of

Philosophy of Science. Ross Arnold, Summer 2014 Lakeside institute of Theology

IDHEF Chapter 2 Why Should Anyone Believe Anything At All?

The cosmological argument (continued)

FINAL EXAM REVIEW SHEET. objectivity intersubjectivity ways the peer review system is supposed to improve objectivity

A Philosophical Guide to Chance

Philosophy 1100: Introduction to Ethics. Critical Thinking Lecture 2. Background Material for the Exercise on Inference Indicators

Hume s emotivism. Michael Lacewing

! Introduction to the Class! Some Introductory Concepts. Today s Lecture 1/19/10

Why Christians should not use the Kalaam argument. David Snoke University of Pittsburgh

Falsification or Confirmation: From Logic to Psychology

out in his Three Dialogues and Principles of Human Knowledge, gives an argument specifically

PHILOSOPHY DEPARTMENT

Delton Lewis Scudder: Tennant's Philosophical Theology. New Haven: Yale University Press xiv, 278. $3.00.

A Warning about So-Called Rationalists

SUPPORT MATERIAL FOR 'DETERMINISM AND FREE WILL ' (UNIT 2 TOPIC 5)

A Judgmental Formulation of Modal Logic

Luck, Rationality, and Explanation: A Reply to Elga s Lucky to Be Rational. Joshua Schechter. Brown University

The Problem of Induction and Popper s Deductivism

What is the Nature of Logic? Judy Pelham Philosophy, York University, Canada July 16, 2013 Pan-Hellenic Logic Symposium Athens, Greece

Aristotle ( ) His scientific thinking, his physics.

Oakland Philosophy Courses

Predictability, Causation, and Free Will

Reasoning, Part I. Lecture 1, MATH 210G.03, Spring 2016

Sample Questions with Explanations for LSAT India

THE RELATION BETWEEN THE GENERAL MAXIM OF CAUSALITY AND THE PRINCIPLE OF UNIFORMITY IN HUME S THEORY OF KNOWLEDGE

Theories of propositions

CHAPTER 13: UNDERSTANDING PERSUASIVE. What is persuasion: process of influencing people s belief, attitude, values or behavior.

Aspects of Western Philosophy Dr. Sreekumar Nellickappilly Department of Humanities and Social Sciences Indian Institute of Technology, Madras

Could Anyone Justiably Believe Epiphenomenalism?

THE GOD OF QUARKS & CROSS. bridging the cultural divide between people of faith and people of science

David Hume, A Treatise of Human Nature ( ), Book I, Part III.

2. Refutations can be stronger or weaker.

Philosophy of Religion 21: (1987).,, 9 Nijhoff Publishers, Dordrecht - Printed in the Nethenanas

Divine omniscience, timelessness, and the power to do otherwise

SKEPTICISM, ABDUCTIVISM, AND THE EXPLANATORY GAP. Ram Neta University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

I. Claim: a concise summary, stated or implied, of an argument s main idea, or point. Many arguments will present multiple claims.

Transcription:

PHIL / PSYC 351 Thinking and Reasoning

The Instructors My name is Jonathan Livengood. I am an assistant professor of philosophy. My primary area of specialization is philosophy of science. Jonathan Livengood

The Instructors The TA for the course is Zach Horne. Zach is working on two PhDs one in philosophy and one in psychology. You should fear him. Zach Horne

The Book Holyoak and Morrison, Thinking and Reasoning. We won t be reading all of the book just 14 of the 40 chapters. However, we will also read several journal articles.

Course Content Thinking and reasoning is pretty broad.

Course Content Thinking and reasoning is pretty broad. What is the course really about?

Course Content Thinking and reasoning is pretty broad. What is the course really about? We re going to focus on four problem areas:

Course Content Thinking and reasoning is pretty broad. What is the course really about? We re going to focus on four problem areas: Induction

Course Content Thinking and reasoning is pretty broad. What is the course really about? We re going to focus on four problem areas: Induction Analogy

Course Content Thinking and reasoning is pretty broad. What is the course really about? We re going to focus on four problem areas: Induction Analogy Causation

Course Content Thinking and reasoning is pretty broad. What is the course really about? We re going to focus on four problem areas: Induction Analogy Causation Counterfactuals

Induction The word induction is vaguer than one might like. It has been used and continues to be used in several different ways. The broadest sense of the term encompasses all uncertain inference.

Induction However, we will typically reserve the term induction for an inference from observed data to an unobserved data-generating process as opposed to an inference from a known data-generating process to data generated by it.

Induction??? Compare

Induction??? Statistical Deduction Induction Compare

Analogy Humans often make inferences about one thing on the basis of its structural similarities to another thing. We infer that something has a certain feature because it is otherwise analogous to or modeled well by something else that has that feature, too.

Analogy A truly scientific illustration is a method to enable the mind to grasp some conception or law in one branch of science, James Clerk Maxwell

Analogy by placing before it a conception or a law in a different branch of science, James Clerk Maxwell

Analogy and directing the mind to lay hold of that mathematical form which is common to the corresponding ideas in the two sciences James Clerk Maxwell

Analogy leaving out of account for the present the difference between the physical nature of the real phenomena. James Clerk Maxwell

Analogy The relational structure over the parts (relata) is the same in the analogues, though the parts themselves might be very different. Analogical inference is uncertain. And so, some would say it is a species of induction.

Causation We humans behave as if the things we do affect the world in various ways. If I flip the light switch, the light will come on. If I publish a lot, I will get tenure. We think that some manipulations or interventions on the world have predictable results.

Causation Moreover, we often say that some specific agent(s) or event(s) caused some specific outcome that we have observed. For example, we might say that a lightning strike caused a forest fire.

Causation Causal relations are importantly different from statistical associations. As we have all learned, correlation (association) does not imply causation.

Causation But as Hume argued, when we scrutinize our perceptual experience, we do not find causal relations, we find at most constant (or less-thanconstant) conjunction, spatial contiguity, and temporal precedence. Hume, the villain

Counterfactuals In introductory logic courses, students learn about the material conditional as a way of translating indicative sentences like: If it is raining, then the sidewalk is wet.

Counterfactuals Natural language has other kinds of conditional as well. One philosophically and psychologically interesting conditional is the subjunctive conditional, which comes in two varieties: If it were to rain, the sidewalk would become wet. If it had not rained, the sidewalk would not be wet.

Counterfactuals Natural language has other kinds of conditional as well. One philosophically and psychologically interesting conditional is the subjunctive conditional, which comes in two varieties: If it were to rain, the sidewalk would become wet. If it had not rained, the sidewalk would not be wet.

Counterfactuals Natural language has other kinds of conditional as well. One philosophically and psychologically interesting conditional is the subjunctive conditional, which comes in two varieties: If it were to rain, the sidewalk would become wet. If it had not rained, the sidewalk would not be wet.

Additional Course Content In addition to induction, analogy, causation, and counterfactuals, we will discuss several related issues, like judgment and decision-making, explanation, concepts, computational modeling, and so forth. In this course, we will all be doing research. I expect to learn, not just to teach.

Course Requirements & Grading About two-thirds of you registered for this course under its psychology designation. The rest under its philosophy designation. The course requirements are a bit different than is typical in psychology courses.

Course Requirements & Grading Three-quarters of your course grade is based on drafts and peer review of a single term paper. In all, you will write five (5) drafts. Two of your drafts will be reviewed by your peers. Two of your drafts will be reviewed by Zach and me. The final draft will be 38% of your course grade.

Course Requirements & Grading The rest of your grade will depend on the best four (4) out of five (5) experiment proposals that you develop with a laboratory working group. We will have much more to say about the proposals and the term paper later.

Course Requirements & Grading Grades are on a 400 point scale. The points are distributed as follows: 4 Experiment Proposals * 25 pts = 100 pts First Official Paper Draft = 25 Second Official Paper Draft = 50 Peer Review = 75 Final Paper = 150

Readings We expect you to complete course readings by the day they appear on the syllabus or on the course website. Come with questions, objections, and interesting thoughts. Discussion will make the course better!

Next Time We will be talking about the relationship between prescriptive and descriptive accounts of thinking and reasoning.