Philosophy 120

Practical Wisdom

A 'wise person' in the sens of having justified insight into how one ought to behave VALUES in order to live well (Values are prescriptive and action guiding) *How one OUGHT TO live in the world*

Theoretical Wisdom

A 'wise person' in the sense of having justified understanding of the FACTS about the world (Facts are descriptive and non-action guiding) *What the WORLD IS LIKE*

What are Poor forms of persuading?

"Words have power, you dumb piece of shit"- Demetri Martin * We must be able to distinguish the logical force of someone's comments from the psychological effect of their comments* -Good critical thinkers will focus on the LOGICAL FORCE NOTE: Rhetorical tricks are often mixed in with arguments. Good critical thinkers will be able to separate them out

Tanslation of Philosophy

'philo' 'sophia'= Love of Wisdom

Factor 4: Advertising

*Advertising [is] the science of arresting the human intelligence long enough to get money from it* SKEPTICISM- is always the BEST policy when considering any kind of advertising or promotion -They know our fears and desires and they have at their disposal the expertise to exploit them "promise ads"= (Ad's that submit reasons for buying the product) Usually tell us more than that a certain product exists, but not much more -promise has no guarantees and is usually extremely vague -AKA the reasons given are usually NEVER good reasons

Bandwagon Effect

- Unconscious tendency to align one's thinking with that of the majority of people around one

(Assesing SOURCE crediblity ) What can be a source of claims?

- people ( including authority figures) -books -texts - groups/societies/businessess -T.V. shows - artists (musicians) -governments - Parents and family

Factor 3: Advocacy Television

-Cable networks show if they are moved left or right, meaning that you can expect them to come with a predictable slant *This is good insofar as it exposes people to opinions different from their own; it is not so good insofar as it simply reinforces what the viewer already believes, especially if there is no evidence offered in support of the opinions* -Always listen with a skeptical ear ( and maybe a jaundiced eye) to political news and commentary. (Caution about accepting claims [without good evidence], and in particular, those with which you sympathize)

Factor 2: Government Management of News

-Fun fact! The government got into the FAKE news business as well -Government would pay for fake news reports, which would appear on the television and touting the virtues of government "schemes" from the prescription drug program to airport safety to education programs * The practice provide material for stations that cannot afford to produce a full plate of news themselves, which includes many, many stations across the country* (This is official propaganda)

Factor 3: Bias within the Media

-Major biases is the political aspects projected within media * General basis from a conservative stand point, reporters and editors are more liberal than the general population* BUT! *The publishers and owners of media outlets tend to be conservative* (They are in business to make a profit) -What is important to remember is that: there are many forces at work in the preparation of news besides a desire to publish or broadcast the whole truth Cable news networks have been an influence on what gets broadcast as news. HUGE TAKEAWAYS- - Like the rest of us, in the news media sometimes make mistakes; accepting claims without insufficient evidence or without confirming the credibility of a source - The media are subject to pressure and sometimes to manipulation from government and other news sources - The media, with few exceptions, are driven in part by the necessity to make a profit, and this can bring pressure from advertisers, owners, and managers *The news media are to a great extent a reflection of the society at large*

Factor 1: Consolidation of Media Ownership

-Media has become controlled by fewer and fewer corporations, which result of many more mergers and buyouts Media ownership has dropped *The fewer hands that control the media, the easier it is for the news we get to be "managed"- either by the owners themselves or by their commercial advertisers or even by the government*

What doesn't count as an Argument?

1)A claim taken alone (a conclusion without support) Example- "Democrats are going to sweep the midterms" 2) "If...then..." sentences- every argument needs at least one premise and conclusion, and these have to be meaningful propositions standing alone Example(s)... "If I were a little taller, my head would touch the ceiling" P1: If I were a little taller C: My head would touch the ceiling ??? More improved argument: P1: If I were taller, my head would touch the ceiling P2: I don't want to touch the ceiling with my head C: We should raise the height of the ceiling 3) List of Facts- lists of facts lack a "therefore" moment do not count as arguments Example(s)... List of facts on a new car! -new tires -interior details *THIS IS NOT AN ARGUMENT*

5 Core Rules for Critical Thinkers *Clue: HBSOC*

1. (UPSHOT RULE 1- Be HUMBLE) Because you are not all-knowing, it is inevitable that some of the beliefs and viewpoints you firmly believe/hold are completely wrong 2. (UPSHOT RULE 2= Getting out of your BUBLE) Until you understand the viewpoints of those who disagree with you, you do not understand your own viewpoint very well 3. (UPSHOT RULE 3= To understand a view, don't simply downplay it. Be able to express it in ways its SUPPORTERS would agree with) Until you can summarize another viewpoint so well that those who hold it agree with your summary, you don't 4. (UPSHOT RULE 4= Be sincerely OPEN-MINDED) If you wish to be considered a critical thinker, you must be willing to seriously consider alternatives and to change your mind 5. (UPSHOT RULE 5 = Be CHARITABLE) Always assume that those with whom you disagree with are as intelligent as you and have motives that are as noble as you do

(Basic properties of Good Arguments) What makes a good argument?

1. Premise(s) must be true 2. Premise(s) must be relevant to establishing the conclusion • Just because it's an argument doesn't mean it is a bad one ( doesn't mean it shouldn't count) Example(s)... "I bleed purple!..." "Anyone who bleeds purple should be the emperor of James Madison..." "...Therefore, I should be the emperor"

Inductive Argument

An argument in which, if the premises are true, then the conclusion is rendered more likely/more probable (along a scale from weak to strong) Example(s)... P1: The Wife's husband threatened her repeatedly P2: The Wife was murdered C: The husband murdered her *Notice that this is a very weak inductive argument* The support for the conclusion is present, but isn't overwhelming *inductive arguments come in degrees of strength, from weak to strong* - Having more premises DOES NOT necessarily make an inductive argument more probable. There are some cases where an inductive argument has very few premises but still very strong Example(s)... P1: 98% of Professor Pipers students come from NOVA P2: Mary is one of Professor Piper's students C: Mary comes from NOVA C: Mary comes from NOVA

Valid Deductive Argument

An argument is valid if it isn't possible for the premise to be true and the conclusion to be false Example(s)... P1: Jimmy Carter was president immediately before Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush was president immediately after Bill Clinton. C: Jimmy Carter was president before George W. Bush. Sound Argument- An argument that is valid deductive in structure AND has premises that are true in the real world *sound argument is the strongest argument there is* [ If we assume premises are true the conclusion must be true] Example(s)... P1: Bill Clinton is taller than George W. Bush, and Jimmy Carter is shorter than George W. Bush. C: Therefore, Bill Clinton is taller than Jimmy Carter

) A major reason for being suspicious of source credibility?

Answer- When that source is an interested party, which means that they stand to gain or benefit in some way from successfully persuading you of something • Even though we should be skeptical when presented with an interested party it is not that interested parties will ALWAYS try to trick us! There are people who count as interested parties but are honest and moral

What are NOT good guides for source credibility judgements?

Answer- physical characteristics Example(s)... " Richard Nixon and John. F. Kennedy" (Political Debate) Nixon- had a heavy beard, terrible make-up, sweating, sloppy, and nervous JF Kennedy- swift and well dressed Nixon's argument was however much better than Kennedy's. *Never assume these characteristics make a person more reliable*

Is our background observations always perfect?

Answer: HELL NO! Example(s)... "cracking your knuckles leads to arthritis" "vaccines cause Autism" "retractions or previously published material being revised" UPSHOT-Good critical thinkers will be aware that personal observations and background information (including their own!) are not always reliable

1) Are our personal observations always perfect?

Answer: NO! Example(s)... "misinterpretation in terms of the law" Falsely accusing the wrong person "under the influence" Relationships "Thinking you share a special moment"

Reason to judge a source actually credible?

Answer= When the source has relevant expertise Example(s)... "Put water on a broken ankle and slap a belt on it" Response: "I have a PhD" "Professor Piper's claims on Philosophy are credible because he has a PhD in Philosophy and this is his expertise"

Cognitive Biases

Are unconscious cognitive influences that undermine our ability to think rationally because they pre-direct our belief systems in various direction * "Cognitive Biases are the enemy! They are hindrances to clear objective, rational thought"* - Cognitive Biases cannot be eradicated; rather, they can be reduced

(The Nature of Argument) Argument definition

Argument- An attempt to establish a conclusion as true ( or probably true) by citing one or more supporting reasons ( also called 'premises') for believing it Example(s).. "I think pot ought to be legalized in Virginia" *without support, you do not have an argument* Make an argument using... "because" (add it WHY?) Supporting details= -medical purposes -mortality rate of other drugs vs. the drug vastly different -regulations (safer) - economically well off (tax on weed) (All these supporting details help to create that argument)

What are Fallacies

Arguments that contain flawed or poor logic

What is a Rhetorical Trick

Attempts to persuade by using emotively charged or misleading language.

What types of questions do Theroretical philosophy ask?

FACTS

Practical Philosophy

Philosophical inquiry for th epurpose of gaining practical wisdom

Theoretical Philosophy

Philosophical inquiry for the purpose of gaining theoretical wisdom

The definition of Philosophy

Philosophy is the discipline of rational inquiry into the truth of reason for, and meaning of our fundamental beliefs ( those that cannot be determined by emperical science) undertaken in order to achieve theoretical and practical wisdom

Premise defintion

Premise- This is a method to make pose arguments easier to read Example(s)... You may hear someone say... "I think that pot should be legalized because it has medical benefits and taxing it has economic benefits" (This can be put into premise - conclusion form) P1: Pot has medical benefits P2: Taxing legal pot can lead to economic benefits P3: Therefore, it should be legalized *For every argument there does not need to be the "therefore" word present, however, there needs to be a "therefore" moment*

What are the 2 branches of Philisophical Study?

Primary Branches (more fundamental and wider range) and Secondary Branches (more specific)

What are 2 types of persuasion

Rhetorical Tricks and Fallacies 1.Good arguments, F's, and RT's are often used in combination (they can come in bundles). Be aware of this, and be prepared to separate out the good from the bad 2. Be careful- don't start seeing F's and RT's everywhere. There are still good arguments out there with no persuasive B.S.

Primary Branches

THEORETICAL: • Metaphysis - the Ultimate nature or features of reality • Epistemology- the study of nature of knowledge and justification of knowledge • Logic- the object of logic studies is the form of proper reasoning ( by implication you will also be discussing what are not proper reasonings) Example(s)... Metaphysis- Big Questions of Nature or Features "What is time?" "What is space?" "Is it possible for anything to exist outside of space in time?" Epistemology- "What is knowledge?" (Senses: see, hear, touch, .etc) Logic- Critical Thinking occurs here PRACTICAL: • (NE) Normative Ethics- studies how one ought to live and treat other people • (NS) Normative Social- studies how society ought to be structured Example(s).... Normative Ethics- "What are the values people should have to live well?" "What are moral obligations to other human beings?" "How ought we treat people?" Normative Social- "What form of government should be placed?" "Should citizens of a country be protected by a healthcare?"

False COnsensus Effect

The unconscious tendency to assume that the beliefs and attitudes held by those around us are also held by society at large Example(s)... "Well I thought everyone did that..." *Believing that everyone acts/ does the same things you do* - A lot of people in the United States have the unconscious mind set that democracy is the best form of government

Belief Basis

The unconscious tendency to find instances of persuasion compelling because you already accept the claim being promoted ( and vice-versa: fining the persuasion on-compelling/ weak because you already disagree with the claim being promoted Example(s)... "Guns should be eliminated" - You favor you will be more likely to favor in biases of someone who also agrees Belief Biases- ( fight against it!!) - Unconsciously agree ("Yeah, good point") because they/ you already have that belief - Unconsciously shut down ("You're crazy")

What are the 2 types of Philosophy?

Theoretical and Practical Philosophy

What is Wisdom?

There are two types of wisdom -Theroretical Wisdom -Practical Wisdom

What types of questions do Practical philosophy ask?

VALUES

What are the 2 kinds of Arguments?

Valid Deductive Argument and Inductive Argument

Credibility (Basics of analysing crediblity)

[Assessing the credibility] • Content credibility- relates to WHAT is said • Source credibility- relates to WHO says it (These forms of credibility are matters of degree (more or less), no absolutes) Example(s)... Credible claim- "The sky is blue" Slightly incredible- "There are 100 clouds in the sky" More incredible- "If I don't study for the exam, I'll be fine" Entirely incredible- "The earth is flat" *There are two ways to asses content credibility* 1) Mesh with our personal observations: things that we have directly experienced (senses) seen/experienced it directly Example(s)... "Ice cream is sweet" 2)Mesh with our background information: body of received information- not directly experienced (NOT DIRECT) Example(s)... "sound doesn't travel in space" "spirits are real" "JMU has "x" amount of students" UPSHOT- The more content of a claim agrees with your personal observations and background information, the more credible it is.

Is there an Argument in Play? STEP 1

[Rational + Irrational persuasion] Example(s)... McDonalds colors: Red and Yellow- proven from statistics that these colors make you hungry

Key simliarities of Philosophy and Religion

both address fundamental theoretical and practical questions ex. "Is there an afterlife?" or "Evil is the result of disobedience"

Key difference of Philosophy and Emperical Science

strict empirical science doesn't address practical questions well Philosophy- abstract "What is justice?" (intangible or difficult to understand) Emperical Science- concrete (real; not abstract), mathematics, experiements

Key difference of Philosophy and Religion

the place of reason vs. faith ex. The existence of God A philosopher would say= "Why should we believe your God exists?"

Key simliarity of Philosophy and Emperical Science

using reason to understand the nature of the world *They are comrades NOT competitors. They are both concerned with understanding reality using reason, but they operate at different levels*

Secondary Branches

• Dozens of secondary branches • Aesthetics- study of what makes something beautiful Philosophies - Religion - Law - Science ( including specific science) - Mind - Mathematics - Human nature - Technology - Language - History Applied Ethics- medical, business, environmental Movements within Philosophy- existentialism, feminism (came to rise), humanism History of Philosophy- Ancient, Mideval ( not thinking 1500-1800), Model, Contemporary

[Credibility and the News Media] pg. 122

• More and more people turn to the internet for their news and information rather than newspapers; and print media because of is unreliability and it has come to be non-credible • However, strangely more and more people claim that this source isn't credible either So.. Why is the level of confidence in our media so low? Factor 1: Consolidation of Media Ownership -Media has become controlled by fewer and fewer corporations, which result of many more mergers and buyouts Media ownership has dropped *The fewer hands that control the media, the easier it is for the news we get to be "managed"- either by the owners themselves or by their commercial advertisers or even by the government*