Lecture Notes For Ultimate Questions: Thinking about Philosophy, 4th Edition

Page 1 of 10

Lecture Notes For Ultimate Questions: Thinking about Philosophy, 4th Edition - Page 1 preview image

Ultimate Questions:Thinking about PhilosophyFourth EditionNils Ch. RauhutCoastal Carolina UniversityInstructor's Resource ManualLECTURE NOTES

Page 2 of 10

Lecture Notes For Ultimate Questions: Thinking about Philosophy, 4th Edition - Page 2 preview image

Page 3 of 10

Lecture Notes For Ultimate Questions: Thinking about Philosophy, 4th Edition - Page 3 preview image

3Table of ContentsChapter OneWhat Is Philosophy4Chapter TwoPhilosophical Tools6Chapter ThreeWhat Do We Know?9Chapter FourThe Problem of Free Will12Chapter FiveThe Problem of Personal Identity15Chapter SixThe Mind/Body Problem19Chapter SevenDoes God Exist?23Chapter EightWhat Ought We to Do?27Chapter NineShould We Be Afraid of Death?31Test Item FileChapter One33Chapter Two34Chapter Three35Chapter Four36Chapter Five37Chapter Six38Chapter Seven39Chapter Eight40Chapter Nine41

Page 4 of 10

Lecture Notes For Ultimate Questions: Thinking about Philosophy, 4th Edition - Page 4 preview image

4Chapter One: What Is Philosophy?Learning Objectives1.1 Explain the similarities and differences between mythology, religion, and philosophy.1.2 Differentiate between scientific and philosophical questions.1.3 Summarize the major fields of philosophy.SUMMARY: Chapter One introduces philosophy by describing the relationship betweenphilosophy, mythology and religion. Philosophy is the attempt to explain the universewith the help of reason. The interrelationship of science and philosophy is the topic ofthe second section. Students learn to differentiate between philosophical questions andscientific questions. The final chapter exposes students to brief explanations of the mainbranches of philosophical study (i.e. logic, epistemology, metaphysics, ethics andaesthetics).Chapter OutlineMaking Sense of the WorldThree methods of explaining the world around us:•MythologyoSimple, powerful stories to make sense of the world in which we liveoBased on cultural traditionoChallenged by questions about truth•ReligionoBased on divine revelation (dreams, meditation, discovery of holy texts)oChallenged by questions about the differences and incompatibilities ofvarious world religions•PhilosophyoPhilosophymeans “love of wisdom”oLike mythology in that it attempts to provide a comprehensive, big-pictureview of the worldoLike religion in that attempts to provide reasons that their big-picture ofreality is trueoPhilosophers do not appeal to divine revelation or tradition to provetheories, relying instead ofreason•Four Key Elements of Philosophy:oKnowledge of how to construct and evaluate argumentsoResponse to persistent questioningoA social activity that requires engaging with othersoCreates a plurality of opinion, sometimes raising doubts about our stronglyheld beliefs

Page 5 of 10

Lecture Notes For Ultimate Questions: Thinking about Philosophy, 4th Edition - Page 5 preview image

5The Relationship Between Science and PhilosophyScience, which just like philosophy is solely based on reason, was originally a part ofphilosophy•Within science there are a variety of disciplines (physics, chemistry,psychology, etc.)•Each discipline has its own methodology and set of questions•Each scientific discipline only considers a part of reality.•There are fundamental (philosophical) questions that go beyond thequestions considered by science. These questions are the naturalfocus of philosophy.Philosophy addresses these foundational questions that go beyond scientificinvestigations. Answering philosophical questions is partly personal because itinvolves taking a subjective stance on ultimate questions.The Main Branches of PhilosophyPhilosophical questions can be divided into five different fields of study:•Metaphysicsis the study of ultimate reality or what really exists inthe universe. It also includes questions of free will and causality.•Epistemologyis the study of knowledge and addresses instances inwhich we try to determine whether the answer to certain questions isknowable. Those who deny that we can know the answers to somequestions are calledskeptics.•Ethicsaddresses how people should act. It tries to find principlesthat can guide our actions.•Aestheticsstudies art and beauty and questions what kinds ofexperiences can be considered aesthetic in nature.•Logicstudies how we distinguish good arguments from bad ones byanalyzing the nature of arguments.

Page 6 of 10

Lecture Notes For Ultimate Questions: Thinking about Philosophy, 4th Edition - Page 6 preview image

6Chapter Two: Philosophical ToolsLearning Objectives2.1 Learn to recognize logical inconsistencies.2.2 Test definitions by using counterexamples and thought experiments.2.3 Differentiate between logical and causal possibility.2.4 Reconstruct arguments in standard form.2.5 Evaluate inductive and deductive arguments.SUMMARY: In Chapter Two, students are introduced to those basic logical tools whichare of importance in the study of philosophy. The chapter starts with a discussion oflogical consistency and subsequently explores definitions and the concept of logicalpossibility. The final section of the chapter is dedicated to the study of arguments.Students learn how to reconstruct arguments in standard form and learn how todistinguish between deductive and inductive arguments.Chapter OutlineLogical ConsistencyPhilosophical investigation requires the search forlogical consistency, whichrequires that all our beliefs can be true at the same time.Logical inconsistenciesexist when not all beliefs can be true at the same time. In order to determine whethertwo statements are inconsistent it is often necessary to investigate backgroundbeliefs.A Demand of Reason: Avoid ContradictionsInconsistencies createcontradictions, i.e., they simultaneously deny and assert thatsomething is the case.•Reason demands that we dispense with inconsistencies in our beliefsDefinitionsIn order to determine whether a given pair of assertions is contradictory, it is oftennecessary to define key terms precisely. Being able to give a definition is thereforeimportant in philosophical investigations•The term which is clarified through a definition is called thedefiniendum. The sentence or phrase that is providing theclarification is called thedefiniens.•An effective method to provide a definition is by listing severalnecessary conditions which are together jointly sufficient for thedefiniendum to apply.The technique of providing a definition with the help of necessary and sufficient conditionsis illustrated in the text with a number of examples.

Page 7 of 10

Lecture Notes For Ultimate Questions: Thinking about Philosophy, 4th Edition - Page 7 preview image

7Logical PossibilityIn real philosophical investigations, different philosophers sometimes disagree whethera given definition captures the meaning of a term correctly. In order to challenge adefinition, it is necessary to show that it is logically possible that there are cases whichare not covered by the proposed definition. These scenarios are calledcounterexamples. In order to develop counterexamples, it is useful to distinguishbetween logical and causal possibility.•Causal possibilityis a state of affairs that does not violate the lawsof nature.•Logical possibilityis what we can conceive in our minds as beingpossible.oIn order for something to be logically possible it must be free ofcontradictions.oPhilosophy seeks to avoid contradictions, which involves checking forlogical, not causal, possibility.Test definitions by using counterexamples and thought experiments.Counterexamples often involve descriptions of fantastic but still logically possiblescenarios called thought experiments. Thought experiments are logically possiblestates of affairs designed to challenge definitions and conceptions.The Basic Structure of ArgumentsIn philosophy, an argument is a reason for thinking that a belief is true. An argumentis made up of a claim, orconclusion, that the argument establishes and reasons, orpremises, offered in support of that claim.Putting Arguments into Standard FormStandard formclarifies the logical structure of an argument, by:•listing all of the premises in numbered, sequential order•including a conclusion at the end.Deductive and Inductive ArgumentsTo evaluate an argument, it must first be classified. Arguments fall into two mainclassifications:•An argument isdeductivewhen the truth of the premises guaranteesthat the conclusion must be true.•An argument isinductivewhen its conclusions are established onlyto some degree of probability.Evaluating Deductive Arguments: Validity and SoundnessA good deductive argument isvalid, which means if all the premises of the argumentare true, then the conclusion must be true as well.

Page 8 of 10

Lecture Notes For Ultimate Questions: Thinking about Philosophy, 4th Edition - Page 8 preview image

8•Validity is a judgment about the logical relationship between thepremise and conclusion.oAn argument is valid if the relationship between the premise and theconclusion is truth-preserving.oValid deductive arguments with true premises aresound.Evaluating Deductive Arguments: Logical FormDeductive arguments can be classified according to their logical form.•Modus ponens:o1) If P, then Q. 2) P. Therefore, Q.•Modus tollenso1) If P, then Q. 2) Not Q. Therefore, not P.•Disjunctive syllogismo1) Either P or Q. 2) Not Q. Therefore, P.•Hypothetical syllogismo1) If P, then Q. 2) If Q, then R. Therefore, if P, then R.Evaluating Inductive Arguments: ProbabilityInductive arguments cannot be ever be valid. Instead, they are evaluated on theirconclusion’s degree of probability.Strong inductive argumentshave conclusions that establish a high degree ofprobability.Weak inductive argumentshave conclusions with a low degree ofprobability.•Enumerative inductive arguments’ probability fluctuates based on therelationship between parts.•Analogical inductive arguments’ probability is based on the degree towhich two parts are similar.•Inference to the best explanation (abductive) argumentsrely on aninference about the relationship of two parts to establish a probableconclusion.Two principles in philosophy can be applied to determine whether a given conclusionis better than others.Ockham’s razorrelies on simplicity for theory construction.Theprinciple of conservatismlooks for conclusions that are compatible with apreexisting belief system and is, therefore, more subjective.

Page 9 of 10

Lecture Notes For Ultimate Questions: Thinking about Philosophy, 4th Edition - Page 9 preview image

9Chapter Three: What Do We Know?Learning Objectives3.1 Describe the criteria used to develop the classical definition of knowledge.3.2 Summarize the key elements of the three theories of knowledge.3.3 Explain the influence of theories of knowledge in evaluating arguments.SUMMARY: Chapter Three addresses the classical definition of knowledge and breaksdown three theories of knowledge: skepticism, empiricism, and rationalism. Studentswill learn about the strengths and weaknesses of each theory and the major philosopherswho have advocated these theories of knowledge.Chapter OutlineWhy Knowledge MattersArguments, are fully reliable only if we can know that the premises of the argumentsare true. We thus have good reasons to take a close look at epistemology and determinewhat we can know.Knowledge, Belief and Other Propositional AttitudesWe can understand the nature of knowledge better if we contrast knowledge with otherpropositional attitudes like hope, belief, and doubt. In order for the assertion “I believethat the Earth is flat” to be true, all that is required is that I have the right kind ofmental state. Knowledge, however, is different. It is impossible to know that the worldis flat since knowledge requires that we understand the world correctly. Knowledgerequires truth. This is called thefacticityof knowledge.Searching for a Definition of KnowledgeThe classical definition of knowledge requires three necessary conditions:•Belief, Truth, and Justification•Knowledge, therefore, is true justified belief.Three Different Theories of KnowledgeThree major theories of knowledge:•Skepticism•Empiricism•RationalismSkepticismA skeptic denies genuine knowledge. Global (or universal) skepticism holds that noknowledge on any subject is possible. Local skepticism focuses on particular fieldsof knowledge or methods of justification.

Page 10 of 10

Lecture Notes For Ultimate Questions: Thinking about Philosophy, 4th Edition - Page 10 preview image

10Descartes’ Quest for CertaintyRene Descartes was the first philosopher to address whether we can preventskepticism from undermining every claim to knowledge.•Descartes created a method for distinguishing mere belief fromknowledge calledDescartes’ method of doubt. It required him todoubt and examine all of his beliefs for certainty. Descartes tried tofind a belief which ne could not doubt to be true.•Many people belief that they cannot doubt what they see at this verymoment (perceptual beliefs), but Descartes was not convinced bythis reasoning. He developed the dream argument which shows thatit is possible that at every given moment in his life, one might bedreaming. However, if this is the case then we can doubt that ourperceptual beliefs are true.•Descartes suggested that there is one belief which cannot be doubtedto be true, namely “I think, therefore I am.” We cannot doubt thatthis is true because if we doubt that we are thinking, we must still bethinking.•Descartes’ solution is however limited. It seems to lead toSolipsismwhich asserts that we can know only the contents of our own minds.EmpiricismEmpiricism maintains that we can know something if we can justify it through oursenses. Famous empiricist philosophers are John Locke, David Hume, and GeorgeBerkely.•We are born with atabula rasa(or “blank slate”), so all of our ideas andconcepts are derived from experience.oWe can distinguish basic empirical beliefs from non-basic (inferential)ones. Inferential empirical beliefs must be justified through empiricalevidence.The Case for EmpiricismArguments in favor of empiricism:•Empiricists justify all knowledge through basic empirical beliefs.•Those basic empirical beliefs are linked to the world around us.•Empiricism is supported by the natural sciences (chemistry, physics, etc.).Problems with PerceptionEmpiricism needs to explainperceptual realism, or how we perceive the world andwhy we can rely on those perceptions.There are three different theories of perception:•Naïve realism (or direct realism)oThe world is exactly as we perceive it.•Indirect realismoNot all properties we perceive in an object are actually in that object.

Preview Mode

This document has 31 pages. Sign in to access the full document!

Report

Learning Tools

Writing Tools

Browse Resources

Lecture Notes For Ultimate Questions: Thinking about Philosophy, 4th Edition - Page 1

Study Now!

Document Details

Related Documents

Test Bank for Ultimate Questions: Thinking about Philosophy, 4th Edition

Microsoft vs

Philosophers on Authority, Property, and Society

The Deadly Picnic A Lab on Deductive Reasoning

A Heart-Wrenching Tale of Sacrifice and Ethical Di

The Concept of the Übermensch in Nietzschean Philo

Symbolic Logic and Truth-Functional Statements

Understanding Logical Reasoning and Argumentation in Critical Thinking

Assignment 1 World View Chart Writing Assignment � World religions paper

Analyzing Logical Fallacies and Inferences: A Study of Reasoning and Argumentation

Company

Explore

Study Tools