Philosophy Midterm

What makes a good argument?

Solid logic and true premises

Conclusion

Statement being supported

3.What is the problem of interaction? Which theory (describe) is most vulnerable to this problem? Why?

Substance Dualism is the most vulnerable to the problem of interaction because it tears apart the foundation of which it was built and is the main weakness for the theory. It states that a conscious being is made up of two different substances, 1) a physical, material body and 2) a non-physical, immaterial mind. And even though these are completely different substances, the two interact causally. The problem of interaction is that it is unclear how a physical body is able to interact with a non-physical mind. Descartes weakly stated that this interaction occurs somewhere within the pineal gland within the brain, but for most philosophers this explanation is inadequate. It appears to be incompatible with science, which states that there is a physical cause for every physical effect. The physical realm operates on the transfer of energy while the mental realm operates on logic, impulse, and desire. Thus, the problem lies in identifying how these two different substances are able to interact.

13. Briefly describe Taylor's Unpredictable Arm thought experiment. What is Taylor trying to establish with this thought experiment? Explain.

Taylor says, supposed that my right arm is free, its actions uncaused. It moves, but nothing causes its motions because they are free and uncaused. However, if the hand were to lay on an innocent bystander, there would be no point in asking why it happened because there is no explanation, it was uncaused and for no reason at all. Taylor is saying that if our actions are ultimately uncaused, then we cannot be the cause. By defining free will as uncaused actions, it takes away any account of moral responsibility. We could not be held responsible for acts that would be "uncaused" therefore taking away responsibility. Indeterminism, the view that not every event is determined by preceding events and the laws of nature, does not appear to allow for moral responsibility. This leads to the understanding that free will should not mean "uncaused" but rather, WE are the cause.

Pre-Socrates

Thales(1st philosopher and scientist) who came up with the scientific method. Empedocles, humans evolved. Parmenides, deductive arguments. 1st to think outside of mathematics and use reason.

What are the four branches of philosophy?

metaphysics, epistemology, axiology, logic

False Dilemma

occurs when it is suggested that only two alternatives exist even though there may be others ie: nothing good on tv, get drunk

appeal to the person (ad hominem)

rejecting a claim by criticizing the person who makes it rather than the claim itself

Epistemology

study of knowledge - truth

Axiology

study of value - good/bad actions, moral responsibility

What makes an argument sound?

the argument is valid and the premises are true

What is Philosophy?

the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence, especially when considered as an academic discipline. A discipline and a process.

Metaphysics

the study of the nature of reality. -Considers science, but mostly covers things that science cannot address. - Mind/body, souls, free will, god, the nature of time

equivocation

the use of ambiguous language to conceal the truth or to avoid committing oneself. Assigning two different meanings to the same word

Is an argument synonymous with persuasion?

NO

begging the question

A fallacy in which a claim is based on evidence or support that is in doubt. ie: the bible

Appeal to Ignorance

A claim is true simply because it has not been proven false (or false because it has not been proven true).

What is the socratic method?

A question and answer dialogue in which propositions are methodically scrutinized to uncover the truth. Never to win arguments, but to get closer to the truth.

4. According to the Mind-Brain Identity Theory, what is it to be in a mental state, and, by extension, to have a mind? Describe at least one strength and at least one weakness (i.e., some problem to which it is vulnerable) of this theory.

According to the Mind-Brain Identity Theory, mental states are identical to physical states. Therefore, to be in a mental state is to be in that physical state, and to have a mind is to have a brain. This theory does not mean that physical states can be defined by or are an extension of mental states, but that they are exactly the same. One strength of this theory is that it offers a better explanation of mind-body interaction than Substance Dualism, the theory that a conscious being is made up of two different substances, because it denies there is any interaction by claiming they are the same. However, a major argument against Mind-Brain Identity theory is that if it is true, we would be able to know everything about a person's mental state just by knowing their brain states. Thomas Nagel's thought experiment against the identity theory showed that we are unable to know the conscious experience of a bat by knowing their brain states, and the same logic can be applied to humans. Therefore, the mind-brain identity theory would be false.

What is a deductive argument?

An argument intended to provide logically conclusive support for its conclusion. All dogs are mammals Rex is a dog Therefore, rex is a mammal

What is an inductive argument?

An argument intended to provide probable, not conclusive, support for its conclusion. "If the premises are true, conclusion is probably true." - All are technically invalid - Strong VS weak

Statement or Premises

An assertion that something is or is not the case and therefore is false.

appeal to popularity

Arguing that a claim must be true merely because a substantial number of people believe it.

Enumerative Induction

Because a certain percentage or amount of things of a given type have a certain property, it is likely all things of that type have that property. "20% in military at UWF, therefore all universities probably have 20% military" ALWAYS ASK: How representative is the sample of the whole?? - Pensacola is a military town, therefore, probably not strong.

analogical induction (argument by analogy)

Because one thing, or group, is similar to another in certain ways, it is probably similar in other ways as well. ie: hunting, fishing, skiing, GARDENING ALWAYS ASK: "Is there a relevant disanalogy?" Do the properties in the premise differ from the conclusion?

9. Briefly describe Chalmers' "Philosophical Zombie" thought experiment. What theory (describe) is it intended to support, and how does it attempt to do so?

Chalmers describes a being on some possible world that is molecule for molecule identical to himself, and behaves just as he does, but is lacking conscious awareness all together. He calls it his "zombie twin." This thought experiment is meant to support some form of dualism, although he is not specific about what form. It looks to be Property Dualism. Property Dualism does not hold that there is a seperate, immaterial mental substance, or a "soul." Rather, it holds that there are mental properties- such as conscious experiences or "qualia"- that can't be reduced to physical property descriptions. His thought experiment argues that even if we had all of the physical information that would not be ALL that there is. All of the physical information would be sufficient to describe the zombie twin, but it would not fully describe Chalmers himself. To fully describe himself, and distinguish him from his zombie twin, we would need information about his conscious experience. The information about his conscious experience is not captured in the physical information so, Chalmers insists, there must be information that is non-physical that captures the nature of conscious experience as well. Therefore, some form of dualism must be correct.

14. What are the two conditions necessary for free will, according to Compatibilism (or Soft Determinism)? Explain.

Compatibilism is the view that although determinism, the doctrine that every event is determined by a preceding event, is true our actions can still be free as long as we have the power to do what we want and we could do otherwise. According to this theory, although our desires are determined (by biology, upbringing, etc.) we still have the free will to by free if abided by those two conditions. To say, "could do otherwise" means that, one would be able to do something different if they desired to. One is free in a sense that if they desired to do something, no one or nothing could have prevented them from doing so.

1. Describe Descartes' theory of Substance Dualism. Discuss at least one strength or advantage of the theory. Also discuss at least one weakness of that theory or problem to which it is vulnerable.

Descartes' theory of Substance Dualism claims that a conscious being is made up of two substances, 1) a physical, material body and 2) a non-physical immaterial mind. He believed that our true selves consist entirely of the mental state; our bodies are just adjuncts. And even though our body and mind are made up of two entirely different substances, they causally interact. One advantage to this theory is that it allows for the possibility of an afterlife and accords with the theological commitments of many. However, even though Descartes held that mind influences body and vice versa, he does not explain how the two interact. He only weakly proposed that the interaction occurs somewhere in the pineal gland within the brain, but for a lot of philosophers this explanation is inadequate. Therefore, the problem of interaction, how mind and body interact, is a weakness for Substance Dualism.

19. What did Sartre mean when he said, "because God is dead, everything is permissible"? How does that relate to his concept of radical freedom? Explain.

Existentialism is a central tenet of which that is humans are profoundly free to create their own lives and thus are completely responsible for defining the meaning and moral relevance of their lives. For Sartre, existence precedes essence and God does not exist, hence "God is dead." Because there is no God, there is no external standard to constrain or determine what we are supposed to do. However, he did not mean that everything is morally okay when saying that everything is permissible. He meant that humanity must construct their own meaning in life because only we can give life meaning. We must decide for ourselves what our core values are and live with integrity. Our "radical freedom" demands that we be self-determining agents, because there is no one else to set our standards but us and no one else to blame.

7. What is the central claim of Functionalism about the nature of mind? Briefly describe the analogy Functionalism uses to convey what their theory claims. Describe an advantage Functionalism has over the Mind-Brain Identity Theory.

Functionalism's central claim is that the mind is the functions that the brain performs. According to this theory, minds are, in essence, a computer program. It performs functions, processing inputs and outputs, just as software of a computer would. So, to have a mind would mean running the correct series on inputs and outputs. Functionalism recognizes the idea of multiple realizability, or the capacity to be realized in a variety of forms and materials. Therefore, a computer is able to have a conscious mind if they are able to function in the way that a human can on the outside. The Identity theory states that physical states are identical to brain states, and to have a brain is to have a mind. Furthermore, if you do not have a brain you are unable to have a conscious mind, like an alien would not be able to feel pain. Functionalism has an advantage over this theory because one would be able to have a mind of a substance that differs from brain matter. The Identity theory limits consciousness to those with brains, while functionalism exendness consciousness to other substances.

Inference to the best explanation

Giving the best explanation about a state of affairs. "Aced the course, studied is best, he probably studied" -Medical diagnoses ALWAYS ASK: Is there a better explanation?

Arguement

Group of statements where one claim (conclusion) is meant to be supported by others

11. Describe the Hard Determinist argument against free will. Do you think the argument is sound? Why or why not?

Hard determinists believe that free will does not exist and no one acts freely. The argument is that, Determinism is the doctrine that every event is determined by the preceding event and the laws of nature, and is supported by the causal principle, or that every event has a cause. This is proved by a non-starting car thought experiment where a car does not start and the owner is told that there is no reason for the car not starting, then offers an exact make and model in return. Most would agree that it would not be rational to accept the same car model because deep down, there has to be a reason and somethings just don't happen without a reason. Determinism and free will are incompatible, because the free will thesis states that some events are free, that is, not constrained by prior causes while determinism states that every event is caused by preceding events. Therefore, the two are not compatible and cannot both be true.

What makes an argument valid?

IF it has proper logical structure. If both of the premises are true, the conclusion must be true A VALID ARGUMENT CANNOT HAVE ALL TRUE PREMISES AND FALSE CONCLUSION

What is denying the antecedent?

If P then Q Not P Therefore, not Q NOT VALID

What is Modus Tollens?

If P then Q Not Q Therefore not P VALID

What is modus ponens?

If P then Q P Therefore Q VALID

What is the rule about a deductive argument?

If the premises are true, the conclusion MUST be true. You can have valid arguments where the cl

12. On Penrose's and James' account, how is indeterminism (randomness) supposed to make free will possible? Can randomness allow someone to be free to act as he or she sees fit? Explain.

Indeterminism is the view that not every event is determined by preceding events and the laws of nature. The view among physicists is that many events on the quantum level are uncaused, however this explanation doesn't convince all philosophers. Penrose argued that free will events are random quantum events in the synapse, However, his critics argue "pixie dust in the synapse!" as a claim for how absurd it is to claim that events just "happen." James believed that a free choice is not determined by preceding events and it is uncaused; that indeterminism is a feature of the universe that permits "alternate futures" and the possibility of freedom. It allows free actions, for free actions are chance happenings. A major argument against indeterminism is that chance alone does not make for free and responsible actions. It all depends on what you define free will to entail. By defining free will as "randomness" or "moments of chance" it takes away moral responsibility.

What are the types of inductive reasoning?

Inference to the best explanation Enumerative Analogical Inductions (Argument by analogy)

18.How does the story of Abraham and Isaac relate to Kierkegaard's concept of freedom? What should we do in order to truly be free, according to Kierkegaard? Explain

Kierkegaard is a Christian existentialist. Existentialism is a central tenet of which is that humans are profoundly free to create their own lives and thus are entirely responsible for defining the meaning and moral relevance of their existence. While most existentialists are atheist, he believes this to be true but that humanity could not know its purpose and reason alone cannot tell us what we are meant for. In fact, reason tempts us away from faith and the only way we can be truly free is if we choose to take a leap of faith and act on our chosen values without proof. God asks Abraham to sacrifice his own son, Isaac, and he planned to do so with no questions asked even though the idea was insane. Before the sacrifice, God ordered Abraham not to do so, for he had shown his true fear and faith in God by being willing to sacrifice his own son. For Kierkegaard, this story is the pinnacle of faith, relying completely on faith with no questions asked despite any temptation to do otherwise.

6.Briefly describe Lewis' "Pained Alien" thought experiment. What theory (describe) is it intended to criticize, and how does it attempt to do so?

Lewis' "Pained Alien" thought experiment intended to criticize the Mind-Brain Identity theory, that physical states are identical to mental states. This theory does not mean that mental states can be defined by or are an extension of physical states, but rather they are exactly the same. Lewis proposes that there might be an alien who feels pain like humans, but differs in the way pain is realized. The aliens hydraulic mind does not contain neurons like ours, but rather varying amounts of fluid in inflatable cavities. When you pinch his skin, there is no firing of neurons but inflation in his feet. When these cavities are inflated, he is in pain. The Mind-Brain Identity theory denies the possibility of alien pain because they do not have a brain like humans do, and therefore could not be conscious and feel pain. When identifying minds with brains, the identity theory takes away the possibility of alien consciousness by denying consciousness with a different physiology. Therefore, the Mind-Brain Identity theory would be false because this possibility is conceivable.

16. What is the best evidence that we are free, according to Libertarians? Do you find that evidence convincing? Why or why not?

Libertarianism claims that real freedom is not just in the power to act if we will act, but the power over the will itself. It is the view that some actions are free, for they are ultimately caused, or controled, by the agent or person. The best evidence for this theory is said to come from our own conscious experience, that we are able to sense the power we have to choose. For example, those who choose to recover from addiction are used in support of this argument. I personally find this evidence convincing because, not only have I experienced the power of choice, but I have seen it in others as well. My father for example came from an incredibly horrible, poor background and decided to choose not to be a victim to his environment and the world in which he grew up. He become the only one out of his six siblings to make a choice to be different, and has a family and life that reflects that choice to this day. I have been raised to believe that I always have a choice in how my life plays out and have a living example in front of me everyday.

17. What is the "infinite regress" argument against Libertarianism? Does that argument convince? Why or why not?

Libertarianism is the claim that real freedom is not just in the power to act if we will act, but the power over the will itself; that some actions are free for they are caused by the person or agent. Many Libertarians agree that our "first order desires" may not be free and are a result of biology or environment, but that our "higher order desires" can be free. According to this theory, our actions are free when it is done by a self-directed agent based on reasons, and reasons are a form of higher order desires. But if one is operating on higher reasons, there needs to be a place where those reasons are satisfied with more reasons, and so on, thus an infinite regress looms. This argument may or may not convince, depending on a person's beliefs. For some, higher orders come from God and believe that there is nothing higher than God, and the regress ends there. However, those without a religious or spiritual background might find it much less convincing.

15. Briefly describe Locke's Trapped Conversationalist thought experiment. Is the trapped conversationalist free, or not free, according to Locke? Explain.

Locke describes someone being carried into a room, while he is asleep, where there is a person that he longs to speak to. He is locked in this room with no power to leave, beyond his desire to get out. He wakes up to find himself in desirable company and decides to stay. This stay, Locke says, is voluntary, however it is not free because the person does have the ability to do otherwise if he desired to. Therefore, freedom is not the idea belonging to volition, but to the person having the power of doing or not doing, according as the mind shall choose or direct. This thought experiment supports the theory of compatibilism, the view that although determinism is true, our actions can still be free. Because, this theory requires that an action is only free if the person desires to do so AND is not constrained by anything. Meaning, the person would be able to do differently if he desired to.

Straw Man

Misrepresenting or distorting a person's ideas views so they can be easily attacked

8. Briefly describe Block's "Chinese Brain" thought experiment. What theory (describe) is it intended to criticize, and how does it attempt to do so?

Ned Block's Chinese Brain thought experiment intended to criticize functionalism, the theory that a mind is just the functions that the brain performs. Mental states are neither brain states nor physical states. Block proposed the idea of convincing the government of China to realize a human mind for an hour. We would hook up each of the billion people with a radio that connects them to an artificial body. According to functionalism, the proper arrangements of inputs and outputs should produce a mind with qualitative mental states. However, there is doubt that the system would have any mental states at all. Merely being in functional states does not guarantee any qualitative mental states, thus functionalism is false.

20. Why does Sartre say we are "condemned to be free"? How does that relate to his concept of radical freedom? Explain.

Sartre was an existentialist, meaning that he believed that humans are profoundly free to create their own lives and thus are completely responsible for defining the meaning and moral relevance of their lives. He believed that we are condemned to be free because on the other side of freedom is responsibility. Freedom does not mean that everything is completely permissible and therefore we should do whatever we want, but rather we have a moral responsibility attached to the ability to be free. Because we are completely free, we are also completely responsible and cannot escape that responsibility, hence being "condemned."

What is a thought experiment?

Similar to actual cases in relevant ways but different in irrelevant ways. It being unlikely is not a good rejection for a thought experiment. It takes you away from the familiar so you can't give an auto, knee jerk reaction, you'll have to think carefully. (intuition pumps)

10. What is the causal principle, or principle of sufficient reason (POSR)? What role does that principle play in the free will debate?

The causal principle is the claim that every event has a cause. Determinism is the doctrine that every event is determined by the proceeding event and the laws of nature and uses the POSR as the foundation for its thesis. However, there are hard determinists and soft determinist positions. Hard determinists deny any possibility of free will while soft determinists believe that the two are compatible and that free will lies in our own desires and the ability to act on those desires. The free will thesis claims that some events are free, that is, not constrained by prior causes. Therefore, according to hard determinists, free will and determinism are incompatible because everything is completely determined. This principle plays a large role in the free will debate because if this claim is true, then free will cannot exist because it is incompatible with determinism according to this reason, making soft determinism false.

2. What is the problem of other minds? Which theory (describe) is most vulnerable to this problem? Why?

The problem of other minds proposes a problem for Substance Dualism, the theory that a conscious being is made up of two different substances, 1) a physical, material body and 2) a non-physical, immaterial mind and these two causally interact. If this were true, that the mind is purely non-physical, then it would be invisible to all perception and instruments of study. So, the problem of other minds asks, "how could you know that another person truly has a mind if it is non-physical and not open to perception?" You can see a physical brain, but there is no indication of a "mind" or "soul" attached to it, because it is non-physical. Thus, the problem of other minds leads to solipsism, the theory that there is no mind that we can truly know to exist other than our own.

Logic

The study of correct reasoning

What is the Philosophical Method?

The systematic use of critical reasoning to try to find answers to fundamental questions about reality, morality, and knowledge.

5.Briefly describe "Nagel's Bat" thought experiment. What theory (describe) is it intended to criticize, and how does it attempt to do so?

Thomas Nagel's thought experiment intended to criticize the Mind-Brain Identity theory, that mental states are identical to physical states. This theory does not mean that mental states can be defined by or are an extension of brain states, but that they are the exact same thing. And, if this is true, we would be able to know all about a person's mental experience by studying their physical brain states. Nagel proposed that bats have experience, and although it is different from a human experience, there is "something that it is like to be a bat." Although we could come to learn everything about a bat's physical brain state and biology, we could never truly know what it feels like to experience the world as a bat. Even if we were able to be consciously put inside a bat, we would still be viewing the world from a human's consciousness, not a bat's. We can apply the same logic to humans, that even if we studied everything there is to know about a person's physical brain states, we will never truly know all there is about their mental states. Therefore, the Mind-Brain Identity theory would be false.

reductio ad absurdum

a method of proving the falsity of a premise by showing that its logical consequence is absurd or contradictory

Can an argument be valid but not sound?

Yes.

Slippery Slope

an idea or course of action which will lead to something unacceptable, wrong, or disastrous.