Philosophy 34-110 (30) WINTER 2005 I. Course Units A) Plato (427-347 B.C.) Jan. 10-Feb. 7 B) Karl Marx (1818-83) Feb. 7-21 C) René Descartes (1596-1650) March 7-28 D) Jean-Paul Sartre (1905-80) March. 28-April 11 II. Course objectives A) Enhance your general knowledge/general education B) Get you to see that many things you think are obvious or self-evident are not so that there are coherent alternatives to them C) Enhance your ability to look at the world from points of view quite different from the point(s) of view into which you have been socialized Lect 1-1
III. What is philosophy? Philosopher (from the Greek word φιλόσοφος) friend of wisdom, i.e., philosophers are those who devote their lives to the pursuit of wisdom or knowledge; intellectuals Science from the Latin word scientia, meaning knowledge. Until the 19 th century, science = philosophy In the 19 th century, the word science came to be restricted to o empirical knowledge knowledge based in a certain way on sensory observation o mathematics Lect 1-2
IV. Major divisions of philosophy 1) Metaphysics or ontology (theory of reality) What sorts of things really exist? Are there gods? Are there real things that aren t physical? Are minds real things that aren t physical? 2) Epistemology (theory of knowledge) What is the difference (if any) between knowledge and mere opinion? What are the sources of knowledge? What sorts of things can be known? 3) Ethics (theory of right and wrong and of good and bad) What makes something good? What makes an action right? Is it good to do what s right? Which goals are truly good (i.e. truly worth striving for)? Which sorts of actions are right (if any are)? Which sorts are wrong (if any are)? When are laws or social institutions good? When are laws or social institutions just or fair? Lect 1-3
Overview of the Republic The original questions fall in the domain of ethics (Part I) What is justice? Should justice be valued? These questions split into questions about justice in an individual person and justice in a state or society Plato s answer to the ethical questions leads him to epistemological questions (Part II) A successful life is one that is based on and guided by knowledge: virtue is knowledge Most people lead wasted lives because they are guided by mere opinion Hence the importance of understanding the difference between knowledge and mere opinion Plato s answer to the epistemological questions leads him to ontology (Part III) You can rise above mere opinion only if you have insight into the natures or essences of the things you have to deal with The natures or essences of things are not things, but are what things owe their reality to Understanding what knowledge is requires understanding the relationship between things and their natures or essences Lect 2-1
Conventional Wisdom and Socratic Teaching (Part I) The three stages in Socratic teaching (for an extended example in which all three steps occur, see Meno, 82c-85c) o First step: Elicit someone s current opinions on a topic o Second step: Get that person to realize that those opinions aren t sound (see comments in Meno, 84a-84c) o Third step: Lead that person (via questions) to discover for herself or himself the truth about the topic The importance of realizing that your opinions aren t based on knowledge o The Socratic stance: always to claim ignorance and to look to another person for answers to questions the pretence that he thinks the other person has the answers is sometimes called Socratic irony o Why is Socrates the wisest man in all of Greece? Because he knows he doesn t know (see Apology, 20d-23c, especially 21d) o Realizing you don t know is the pre-condition for any learning (see Meno, 84a-84c) Lect 2-2
Conventional Wisdom and Socratic Teaching (Part II) Examples of Socrates engaging in steps 1 and 2 o Republic, chapter II: Polymarchus gets into trouble because he can t give a coherent explanation (definition!) of what is due or owing to a man. o Republic, chapter III: Thasymachus gets into trouble when he tries to explain (define!) who the stronger party is. o In neither case is the initial view of Polymarchus or Thrasymachus refuted o All that is proved is that they cannot explain their initial views coherently in the face of questions about those initial views The importance of definitions in Socratic teaching o Plato s analysis: people like Thasymachus and Polymarchus turn out to have mere opinion because they have taken over words without becoming sufficiently clear about the significance of those words o Without achieving a clear understanding of what those words signify, they rely on other people s use of words to give those words a shadowy significance Lect 2-3