This site is 100% ad supported. Please add an exception to adblock for this site.

Gphil 101


undefined, object
copy deck
emphasizes the meaning of life to the individual, meaning of choices
analyzing terms and concepts, wants clarity
assumes you can get answers
Ethical Relativism
there are no objective judgments, no moral standards
attempts to determine the nature of reality by reasoning
studies nature without offering mythological explanations
assumes there is an order to the universe
address the question, what is real or fundamental, not subject to change?
assumes just one underlying principle
mind or soul
philo (lover of) sophia (widsom)
history of philosophy
examines various views held by philosophers to understand the view and to determine if it is true and well supported. Studied in a critical manner
science that studies the methods and principles by which correct reasoning is distinguished from incorrect reasoning
studies the nature of being and of different kinds of being. What is real? Ontology: onta( what is real, stable) ology (study of) what is real? materialistic, concepts, laws, intellectual views
study of knowledge
: study of certain aspects of morality and of the language of morals
considers how ethical principles ought to be applied to particular situations
meta ethics
analyzes ethical terms and concepts and evals normative ethical theories. Definitions of terms evaluates standards
considers the value of beauty
concerned with every value. What makes something valuable?
philosophy of ____
examines the fundamental assumptions underlying the object of its analysis
pre socrates
what is the underlying stuff of the universe? How does change occur? rationalistic explanations of natural events try to give explanations on natural grounds how does change occur? unity and plurality, one and many looking at natural phenomena and use a naturalistic approach Thales, Anaximander, Anaximenes, pythagorias, parmenides, heraclitus
ability to measure a relationship in a predictable way, typical pattern t express the natural structure or order of what is being measured
assumes all matter is alive
discovered relationships btwen length of string and tone ratio: express the natural order of what is measured unity of the universe is its structural order if you know something you can measure it
father of philosophy everything is water underlying unity
underlying unity of everything is "aperion" "the boundless" infinite, no qualities, no boundaries, no limits, potential, so many qualities you can't count
underlying unity of everything is "pneuma" breath air condensation/rarefaction
orphic religion
belief in reincarnation to escape reincarnation to purify your pysche you must study music or geometry (keeps intellect from being scattered)
normative ethics
constructs a normative theory by which human actions may be judged. what makes an action morally good or right?? sets a standard
3 types of people
athletes: participate active role spectators: watch and enjoy observe vendors: make $
everything changes EXCEPT the logos created tricky statements to keep stupid people from understanding uses metaphor of fire those that understand the divine logos has a dry soul those that dont have a wet soul dry: can distinguish things from one another in nature
logos and divine logos
logos: reasoning capacity and reasons diving logos: fundamental law logos DOES NOT change things change because of the logos
the way of truth: reliable way of opinion: can't count on it way of nonbeing: doesn't exist so cant make claims absolute nonbeing
way of truth
being is, being cannot not be, being doesnt come into existence, being cannot be destroyed, being is the object of thought, being cannot change, being is one, being is something intelligible NOT physical
logos and being
INTELLIGIBLE physical things change
wise man sophocles thrasymachus hippocrates phidias thucydides and SOCRATES
man is the measure of all things
epistemological relativism
whatever one says is true IS true no objective standard
principle of noncontradiction
contradictory statements cannot both at the same time be true ~(px~p)
metaphysical nihilism
objects do no exist or there is a world where only abstract objects exist
ethical nihilism
belief that there are no bases for establishing a moral or ethical philosophy
from mitetus, town on the ionian coast, pre socrates, referred to milesians or milesian materialists
ordered underlying unity of the universe
A collection of two or more propositions, all but one of which are the premises supposed to provide inferential (evidence based) support—either deductive or inductive—for the truth of the remaining one, the conclusion. The structure of arguments is the principal subject of logic.
A statement whose truth is used to infer that of others
A proposition whose truth has been inferred on the basis of other propositions assembled with it in a logical argument.
counter example
A particular instance that demonstrates the falsity of a general claim
A logical falsehood. A statement which, by virtue of its form, cannot be used to make a true assertion.
sophist defines justice as "whatever the person in power says it is" position is that of ethical relativism definition of justice would change depending on how was in power
objective moral concepts
socrates and plato denied ethical relativism and insisted that there were objective moral concepts such as justice
pythagoras' ratio
rato: allows one to claim knowledge not just sense perception
being and logos are intelligible not physical physical things can change
a priori
based on reason alone, independent of sensory expereince apply with strict universality
analytic a posteriori
not possible
analytical a priori
relations of ideas
empirical any knowldege comes after experience objects impress on the mind
cause and effect
a causes b a comes before b constant junction, if a, then b a and b must be contigious (touching)
classical realism
human mind has the capacity to know and there is a reality that can be directly known
clear and distinct
self evidently true cant imagine contrary
complex sciences
physics, medicine easier to doubt more complex than simple based on sense perception
complex sense perceptions
senses deceive us
conceptual construct
concept with no instantiation
corporeality in general
extended in space, size, numbers harder to doubt more abstract and general
descartes tries to refute universal skepticism
wants to find one statement that cannot ever be doubted, it will show 2 things: something that is absolutely certain and cannot be doubted the mind has the capacity to know
all our knowledge comes directly or indirectly from our sense perception
fallacy of existential instantiation
just ceause we have an idea of something doesn't mean it exists
view that a theory of knowledge must be founded on something that is absolutely certain i am, i exist
wanted to show that knowledge claims such as those made in rationalistic metaphysics are not legitimate knowledge claims all objects of human understanding fall into 2 groups: ideas of matters relations of ideas
that by which we make something else outside of ideas by which we know something else
point to an existing object
subject and predicate every judgement has a quantity universal, particular, or singular
believed metaphysics involved claims about reality and if metaphysics was to be mroe mere opinion the claims must be true
attributing something to a subject a feature is attached or unattached to the subject
matter of fact
contraty to any mater of fact is always possible not contradictory to deny based on sense perception based on cause and effect informative
metaphysical dualism
mind and body differ in essence essence of body is extension and the essense of mind is thinking gives rise to the mind body problem
metaphysical monism
position that the person is not comprised of 2 distinct essences
mind body problem
how does the mind get the body to do anything? assumes that something immaterial (thinking) cannot affect something physical extended in space
everything both physical and mental is comprised of monads intended to resolve the mind body problem, if even phyiscal things are comprised of non phyiscal monads, physical and non physical things do not differ in essence and they can affect eachother
windowless invisible centers of intelligence
general terms dont refer to anything
ontological proof
from the conception one had of x to the claim that x actually exists. always commit fallacy of existential instantiation proof for the existence of God
partial skepticism
there are some things one cannot know not objectional
what we gather and take from an object
soem of our knowledge about reality does not come directly or indirectly from sense perception descartes and kant
relations of ideas
if true, necessarily true cant deny cannot deny w/o contradicting yourself evidence by reason alone principle of noncontradiction not informative
sense perception forman and material
formal: a priori: holds true for every sense perception material: what differentiates one sense from another
simple sciences
hardest to doubt geometry and arithmetic
ideas are figments of our imaginations
simple sense perceptions
arms, head, legs: physical parts becomes more difficult to doubt
strict formal rules
independent of a given experience neccary strict universality
the predicate is not contained in the subject gives you information this chalk is white
universal skepticism
one cannot know anything faulty position cannot be articulated without the assumption that one knows something
aristotle first causes
material: basic stuff a thing is made of formal: pattern in which materials are put together efficient: whatever brings the matter and form together final: purpose for which a thing exists
fallacy of reductionism
reducing objects of concepts of common sense to how a physists would reduce it Adler: can't reduce a physical thing to physics
doesn't change made up of things and attributes sequence of happening with a duration
only thing that can change exist on their own changed caused by efficient cause
exist in something else don't change
myth of the cage stages
stage 1: opinion stage 2: common sense stage 3: understanding stage 4: knowledge
descriptive premise
all humans have a need to know
prescriptive premise
we ought to desire what is really good for us and nothing else
apparent good
differs from person to person
natural needs
distinct for all humans knowledge objective?
only ideas are real
only physical things are real
admits reality of things other than matter but everything depends on matter
ethical absolutism
there are objective moral standards
cultural relativism
cultures differ on moral standards
normative ethical theory
offers a standard for judgment
moral goodness depends on consequence of action
moral goodness depends on something else
Mill's position on pleasure
some pleasures are ranked some are better than others better pleasure: ask someone who has experienced both and choose the one they choose as the better pleasure
hedonistic error
pleasure is the sole good we seek good = pleasure what about friends? wealth? knowledge?
different no absolute truth
varies at time to time every moral problem has its unique features
stays the same, truth
coherence theory
true if it says how things really are
speculative reasoning
discover truth arete...virtue intellectual virtue
practical reasoning
what should i do? how should i feel? moral virtue
intelligible object
detect/apprehend but cannot perceive through sense perception souls, angels, God, liberty, justice
real good
things all of us by nature need, may consioucsly or unconsciously desire, the need exists whether we know it or not
Adler's 1st principle of moral philosophy
we ought to desire whatever is really good for us and nothing else
lower v. higher goods
lower: limited goods, sensual pleasure and wealth, things that are good in moderation higher: unlimited, knowledge, cannot have too much
natural v. acquired desire
natural: inherent in our nature and are the same for all humans acquired: differ from invididual to individual, difference in temeperament according to different circumstances and affect their development
needs v. wants
needs: they are whate are really good for us, no wrong needs, right desires wants: may be what we want but are actually bad, may be wrong desires
empiricism philosopher
HUME knowledge comes directly or indirectly from sense perceptions
rationalism philosophers
KANT and DESCARTES some of our knowledge about reality does not come directly or indirectly from sense perception
classical realism philosopher
ADLER human mind has the capacity to know and that there is a reality that can be directly known
common nature, defined differently be different subgroups of humans different languages
determinate characteristics
behavioral, anatomical, physiological limited, definable animals
sociobiological and are genetically determined can only determine human potentialities not their behavioral development potentiality humans are defined by it
set of defining characteristics water= stable, liquid
objects to which the term is correctly applied glass of water, water in the pond, rainwater
ontological argument
an argument that assumes merely because a term can be defined theat there exists objects to which the term can be applied just b/c it has an intension it also has an extension
use of the intellect to attain truth about that which it contemplates desire to know
use of the intellect to guide one's activity in 2 areas: feeling action tries to find good answers to the questsion what should i do? how should i feel? act in accoradnace with the best reasoned courses ethics and politics
concerning with making produce something how well the intellect has reasonsed is determined by the quality of the resulting product
principle of subjectivity
what man chooses for himself he chooses for all of mankind
man's understanding that what he chooses for himself he chooses for all of mankind. the views he has effect the views of others
refers to having to face the consequences of god not existing. having no excsues or justification and having no values to base our conduct are consequences of god not existing
we only consider what depends on our will. nothign can dapt possibilities to one's will. only rely on what you can control with your own actions

Deck Info