PHIL FINAL

Start Studying!

Terms

undefined, object

copy deck

Aquinas' explanation that human soul is both form of body, and spiritual being: -human soul is a frontier being, on the border etween worlds of material/immaterial.
-Soul is lowest immaterial being; intellectual.
Averroes' reading of Arist: is intellect part of us?: "There is one intellect for all humans below the sphereof the moon."
-Intllct is outside humans, therefore highest power of soul is imagination.
-No personal immortality
Aquinas' response to Averroes Is the intellect part of us?: Frontier being; without individual souls/intellects there could be no salvation, or forgiveness of each person.
Three acts of mind, classes to which they belong (for Arist): ACT CLASS
Simple intuition - words/terms
judgement - propositions/subject-predic.
Reasoning/inference - syllogism; argumnt
self-evident proposition: -a per se known proposition; knowledge of simple terms drawn from experience.
-primary axioms of thought.
-premises that need no argument to be proven!
Principle of Non-contradiction: Nothing can both be and not be at the same time
Nothing can both be and not be at the same time, in the same way.
-This is a primary axiom of thought; needs no proving
What is a non-self evident proposition?: not a per se known, common knowledge..
needs proof
possible via scientific demonstration or SYLLOGISM
syllogism: a logical argument consisting of three categories which are necessary.
-If the premises are valid, the conclusion must be true, and therefore evident.
Demonstration: testing w/ logic to see if premises or arguments are true in form
Arist's 3 acts of mind response to Plato's Recollection theory: -We can have knowledge not apriori.
-Through syllogisms we can know something not experienced w/out prior knowledge of it.
Scientism: Theory that one should only believe in that which has been proven by science
Eccle's solution to mindbody problem What's his position?: We don't need to know or care about it; the soul is a ghost in a machine.
Eccles is a Cartesian Dualist; the mind is linked to the brain.
cognitive epistemology: a branch of philosophy that investigates the nature and limits of human knowledge
Aristotle's Account of Cognition: 1. A change in the cognitive power, the power of the soul.
2. The object cognized causes the change.
3. "Likeness" the third feature coming to be in our cognition. This is the FORM that actualizes the object in our mind. UNIVERSAL FORM
Why we cognize the same form as that which actualizes matter (Arist): What's in reality an only have its own form; if we abstract a form from reality, it can only be this form.
Aquinas' internal vs. external senses: Internal: imagination, memory, instinct, common sense.

External: the five senses; require an object present to be sensed.
Internal requires no object
***Why Intellect is a Power Distinct*** ********** from Sensation. **********: -The soul canÂ’t be sensed with sense perceptions
-Sensation only yields particular knowledge; intellect allows synthesis of particular knowledge into universals
-Nothing is in the intellect unless first in senses, so without sensation there can be no intellect
Universal idea for aristotle How it's aquired: Universal = proper object of knowledge.
Drawn out from similarities between particulars.
Plato's idea of a Universal: World of forms controls universals; they are apriori, and pre-exist in the mind. We know them, but re-call them because they were shocked upon entering this life.
ABSTRACTION (arist): -Draw out commonality from two objects, leaving behind whatever is particular to each object.
-Commonality is the universal.
If you have two dogs, the universal commonality would be the dog-ness; color, size, etc. is left behind.
Arist Argument for Immaterial Intellect (argument 1): 1. Assume intellect is material
2. Knowing: extramental form of object comes to be in the intellect.(TOK)
3. If material, then matter is informed by the object's form.
4. Implies form/matter composite coming to be in your head - Rocks in Geologist
5. Therefore, intell. is immaterial.
Arist Argument for Immaterial Intellect (arguement 2): 1. Assume intellect is material.
2. Know = universal drawn from object, coming to be in the intellect.
3. Matter = pure princip, individuation.
4. If the intellect is material, then object would become individual; no universals! absurd.
5. Therefore, the intellect is immaterial.
Arist's argument for active/passive nature of mind (not senses): Passive Int'll Power = Sensation; something in reality comes to be in the mind.
Active Int'll power = cause of universal knowledge; cause of thought.
Nature of Arist's reaction to plato: An empirical, scientific reaction to plato; gives an account of not only what a thing is, but what it is made up of.
Arist's 1st Definition of Soul: 1st Substantial Actuality of a Natural Body, Capable of life
Aristotle's images of the soul/body: Axe/power to cut
Eye/power to see
Soul/power to be
Arist's 2nd definition of soul: Soul is principle of the different kinds of life, in different living things.
Why Arist's 2nd Definition is important: 1st definition gave one soul to every prime matter capable of life.
2nd def gives different souls to different living things, so that plants don't have the same soul as humans.
5 powers of soul, for aristotle: Nutritive, Sense, Desire, Self-locomotion, intellect.
Proper objects: color for sight, flavor for taste,
odor for smell, sound for hearing
common objects: apply to all objects, regardless of their nature;
TWO: can hear 2 sounds, see 2 things.
DEGREE: can hear something very loud or soft, see something very bright or dim.
3 classes of living things; How many souls? more than one?: vegetable, animal, human.
NO! only one soul, with adntl powers
Plants: vegetative
Animals: locomtion, desire, sensation
Humans: intellect
Pentagon: Pentagon contains a triangle; it can be a triangle, but a triangle can only be that or less, not a pentagon.
Humans can be plants/animals, but animals do not contain the powers of humans.
Plato - One Over The Many: BEGINS w/ diff in Strong/Weak Knowledge
1. Phenomenon of same/diff - triangles
are same form, but different particul.
2. No one object is the identity itself.
3. A number of particulars are not identity.
4. Identity not an IDEA/CONCEPT; we can stop thinking about it and it still exists.
5. Identity not NOTHING; hume says it is
6. There is ONE IDENTITY over many particulars.
Plato; strong knowledge: necessarily, unchangeably, eternally true. never false, never otherwise.
Plato; opinion (soft) knowledge: maybe true, false, or neither.
anything to do w. body, perceived via senses. (count 26 bodies, we could make a mistake, so that's not knowledge).
Platonic dualism: humans are soul+body composites
-soul is immortal (=divine Gods)
-body is mortal (=slave of gods)

Care for the body by contemplating on the forms, not sense perception (bodily pleasures)
Aristotle's Hylomorphism: Body/soul composite
-soul is the form of the body;
-body is the matter of the soul.
Images of Platonic dualism: Sailor (form) on a ship (body)
Rider on a horse

SOUL ON A BODY (governing it)
Who is Aristotle?: Plato's student of 20 yrs.
After plato died, criticized his theory of forms and developed his own theory.
Berkeley: EMPIRICIST, IDEALIST
Berkeley's argument: 1. That of which I have no idea is inconceivable - doesn't exist.
2. I have an idea of X, therefore it's conceivable.
3. ONly ideas are perceivable.
4. Perceivable things must be ideas or they are unpercievable.
5. Ideas exist only in the mind, so reality must only be in the mind.
reality for berkeley: ideas and minds
Hume's basic premises of EMPIRICISM: 1. All knowledge is a bundle of percept.
2. Each percept. is distinct existence in space and time.
3. One can never necessarily infer from one perception to the next
third school of viennese psychotherapy: logotherapy
human fundamental drive (logotherapy): to find meaning in life
Frankl's 3 kinds of meaning: love, suffering, essence of existence
Knowledge for Hume: Impossible to know nature of a thing!
-All knowledge is a bundle of percept.
Memory= fuses past percept together, and we use that as knowledge of something's identity - but its not.
Human Identity (self) for Hume: A bundle of perceptions
A snapshot/theatre of pictures, connected by the memory.
3 ways to find meaning for frankl: -do a deed;
-encounter/experience someone/thing;
-attitude toward unavoidable suffering
nihilism: nothing has meaning
ancient conception of soul: PRINCIPLE OF LIFE
-2career phenomenon (life/death)
-Soul explains difference betwn life/death.
Father of Modern Philosophy: Descartes
17th century
Response to skeptics

Cartesian Method, Dualism, Mind/body complex interaction theory
Cartesian Method: 1. Methodical Doubt: I doubt I exist
2. Clear/Distinct ideas: math (no sense)
3. Doubt Clear/Distinct ideas; Therefore I exist.
4. Doubt that I doubt; I exist.
5. Bridge/Perfect Being; must exist - is perfection. Not an evil deceiver
Consequence of Cartesian Method: Can you infer that ideas in mind infer existence in reality?
Only 2 IDEAS: yourself, perfect being.

This allows inference that clear/distinct ideas infer existence.
Cartesian Method applied to human nature: Humans are composition of body and soul; A ghost in a machine extended in 3-D space.
Difference in Body/Mind for Descartes: Mind is an immaterial thinker; not a mathematical, extended-in-space thing.

Body is extended mathematical entity in space. Material
Natural World Reduction (Descartes): -No Cartesian Dualism in natl substance
-Not thinking things
-Only extended in space.
-Candle was changes conformation, but remains candle wax.
-Properties of bodies true, sensible qualities not though.
Sensible Qualities - Do they exist? Descartes: -No, not in reality.
-Bodies are fully mathematizable; do not have sensible qualities.
Sensible qualities are how you perceive in your head the mathematic qualities.
Relation of Mind/Body Descartes: Mind/Body are opposites; immaterial vs. mathematical.
So how do they work together?
Mind is in the pineal gland, it jiggles the nerve endings. Pineal is site of INTERACTION.
What Animals are (for descartes): -Only an extended in space body.
-A complex machine that lacks the ghost.
(It does not think or doubt)
What is Life, for descartes: The machine, working.
-No radical difference btwn life/death, only mechanisms working or not.
Interaction theory of Mind/Body (desc) one-way or two?: works both ways; things act on body to jiggle pineal to make mind feel pain.
mind jiggles the nerves to make body do stuff
Cartesian Dualism Characteristics: Plato: rider/horse
Descartes: agrees that mind is superior to body, but no world of forms, no theory of knowledge. (plato=apriori)
Problems w/ Cartesian Dualism: -How does material act on immaterial?
-how does immaterial act on material?
Malebranche: Addition to Cartesian dualism because of lack of concrete mechanism for mind/body interction.

-God is constantly acting on the mind and body to create perfect harmony.
Leibniz: God is the clockmaker, allows interaction of body/mind, then goes golfing.
(due to mind/body problem of cartesian dualism)
Problems w/ Berkely: Where did your ideas come from?
-We know particulars first
-We can't know ideas without something to cause them, to give them.
-That which IS known, that BY WHICH it is known. We KNOW things, but there has to be something BY WHICH it is known.
Berkely makes them the same.
solipsism: you're the only thinking thing in the universe.
Berkeley -
That which IS known vs. That BY WHICH it is known: the IDEA vs. the SUBJECT of the idea.

idea of red, actual color of red
Kant's understanding of sensation: 1. Points in reality; we use filters of space and time to construct our understanding and perception.
2. We don't know if our perception is what's in reality, we just don't know.
Kant's Idealist Nature - why?: Kant is idealist because he believes there is no material reality, just a bombardment of points.
Space/Time - real for Kant?: YES. A human construct, real in our heads.
How science is possible for Kant: We all have the same rose-colored glasses, filters of space and time. Therefore, we can have universal 'knowledge', we just don't know if it's true in reality.
Kant's philosophy of humans:: -Self is the starting point of philosophy. We don't know if reality is true.
-There are no clear/distinct ideas of the self, but we need freedom and human immortality for ethics. Requires faith.
Difficulty in reconciling ideas/reality: immaterial mind, material objects to know. hard to put in one framework
realism in general extreme moderate: -universals are real or founded on reality.
-extreme: universals are true form of reality. (plato)
-moderate: universals aren' real but founded on what is real. (aristotle - form from matter)
nominalism: universals are only words/concepts, not corresponding to reality - HUME
Idealism: general: general: start w/ ideas in the mind, use to interpret reality.
Idealism: moderate: Descartes
One can't base reality on senses.
We have ideas and can infer we have minds (i exist) and there is extramental reality (perfect being)
radical idealism: berkeley
all is just ideas in the mind; nothing based on sense perception, so cannot infer extramental reality. God gives us the ideas.
critical idealism: KANT
we are bombarded by points and we create a temporal, spacial knowledge; we don't know if this is extramental reality, or if there are minds.
affectivity and appetitive powers: desires; wanting; craving
This is where freedom comes in.. we can make choices, not just determined by desires
Cognitive powers: sense perception. you open your eyes and cognize light and color
Libertarian freedom: To be truly free, there can be no cause whatsoever; choice without prior cause.
moderate freedom: aristotle; we are presented with at least two choices (by our intellect) and that causes our choice.
determinism: prior causes lead necessarily to one's choices; there is no free will
Hard determinism: there is no choice; freedom is an illusion
Soft determinism: there are choices, but not free choices.

2 types: fatalism, necessitarianism
fatalism: (god knows where you'll end, dont worry)
Choices are inevitable and prescribed.
You are not responsible for the end, because you had no choice to begin with.
Necessitarianism: Soft determinism; Mill contests fatalism because there is no responsibility.
-We can make choices, but they are determined by prior cause. Someone who knows me REALLLLLY well can tell me what I will choose, because I am determined like that.
2 senses of freedom: libertarian: we make choices that are in no way caused by prior choices/action

moderate: we choose from at least two options that are from prior action.
Plato's Bipartite Soul Argument: 1. Nothing can do or suffer oppostites at the same time in the same respect.
2. We experience Akrasia; weakness of will; simultaneous desire for opposites.
3. No such thing can have both desires at the same time, so there must be two sources/parts to soul; rational vs. craving/temper
How Bipartite Division Argument allows for freedom: It gives us options; craving/temper wants opposite of rational part of the soul. Therefore, we have to choose between the options and our choice is free, so there is freedom.
Rational vs. Sense Appetites; Objects of each: Rational: object is GOOD, an idea.
Sense: a thing that is desirable.
Relation btwn Cognition and Desire: Cognition presents the object as desirable or not desirable,
Then you act.
Objective Specification of Will (aquinas): WHAT we will
Subjective Exercise of Will: WHETHER we will (always goes toward the good)
Does Freedom lie in the Objective Specification, or the Subjective Exercise?: Meaning are we free in what we choose, or whether we choose?
Mostly in the latter; we can't say what will be presented for choice, but we can decide whether or not to choose.
EXCEPTION: we aren't free in the overall subjective exercise, the GOOD, unless we wil not to will at all.
End for the will: That which is willed for its own sake; not as a means for attaining another goal, like the ultimate end of GOOD (flourishing).
Ultimate End: The flourishing; we are determined to will this ultimately, by making particular choices for means. we can also make choices for ends, but not for the ultimate end.
Relation between Freedom of Will and Reason (Aquinas): Reason is necessary for Freedom, because the intellect presents to us the reasons for making a choice, and have at least 2 possibilities available is necessary for freedom.
Syllogism for Will action after Grasping a Good: I want oreos, happiness is oreos, oreos make mad dad, I want Dad to be happy, so therefore, no oreos.
-We can make desire-independent choices for action.

Start Studying!

Deck Info

Number of cards 103