Test key ideas from Baggini & Fosl's toolkit.
1
What is a deductive argument guaranteed to produce when premises are true?
2
Which tool analyzes which explanation best fits the evidence?
3
What does 'Hume’s fork' separate in knowledge?
4
What does 'Socrates’ elenchus' aim to do in dialogue?
5
Which concept distinguishes what a term in language refers to?
6
The dialectical process where 2 ideas compete in society, a thesis and antithesis compete, until a resolution is reached, "synthesis". For Marx and Engels, this came from a struggle of economic classes- to bring about classless society (communism baby!)
7
The dialectical process where 2 ideas compete in society, a thesis and antithesis compete, until a resolution is reached, "synthesis". For Hegel, this was a clash of spirit and ideas- to result in absolute knowing.
8
Unclear information that doesn't seem to have any clear meaning.
"What this society needs is to be better."
This sentence tells us nothing about society
9
Unclear information which could say something different than intended.
"Everything has a cause."
This sentence could mean any one of the following three statements:
a. Each individual thing has a different, individual cause unique to it.
b. Each individual thing has the same single cause.
c. The totality of things has a single cause
10
For any statement P, P or not-P must be true. Entailed by bivalence.
11
Every statement is true or false, there is no middle. UNLESS, the concept of vague or subjective.
12
A competition of philosophical ideas where one party is making a categorical mistake. IS "the university a (building) object in particular rather than the whole collection of buildings?"
13
To hold that a thing is of a different category than it actually is.
14
An idea to not make any sense
15
‘all other things being equal’: A clause in an argument meaning that outside factors things not mentioned, are not relevant.
16
A component of a logical statement
17
To reverse a statement such that it is the opposite of what it currently is. For "the sky is blue" a negation would be "the sky is not blue" or "is it not the case that the sky is blue"
18
A form of reasoning that moves from specific observations to a broader, probable conclusion.
19
Standard by which something can be judged or decided’. So, if someone argues that a person has knowledge iff what she believes is justified and true, she is offering criteria for knowledge.
20
A situation where not only is the conclusion justified by the premises (as it is in any sound or cogent argument) but the premise(s) are also justified by the conclusion. A type of begging the question.
21
The vague concept "fatness" can be used to show a middle ground between the idea of being something being the case and something not being the case, against bivalence.
ask the question of this person, if he lost 1 gram of weight, would he still be
fat? The answer is surely yes – someone does not go from being fat to not fat
by dint of losing 1 gram. Now we can ask of this person who is 1 gram
lighter, would losing a further 1 gram make him not fat?
22
To interpret and make sense of a text's parts in relation to its whole, like to make sense of the bible with other parts of the bible.
23
The attempt to understand the metaphysical, epistemological, semantic, and psychological, presuppositions and commitments of moral thought, talk, and practice. As such, it counts within its domain a broad range of questions and puzzles, including: Is morality more a matter of taste than truth? Are moral standards culturally relative? Are there moral facts?
24
Argue that our the origins of knowledge find their justification not ultimately by anchoring them in the world or in sensations but rather simply in the relationships among their theoretical claims
25
Ethical Theories that seek criteria for right or wrong. Includes consquentialism, deontology, virtue ethics
26
Focuses on the content of morality, or the actual moral principles, values, and duties themselves, rather than just the process of ethical decision-making. It is concerned with what makes an action right or wrong, and it provides specific rules or guidelines.
27
The idea that ethical norms can be broken if there is a proportional reason to do so.
28
To show us that, though our position is mistaken, our error was nevertheless an understandable one to have made given the true facts of the matter.
29
Creating a theory or model that adequately explains and accounts for observed reality, or "appearances".
30
'non causa pro causa' Examples include: Post hoc, Cum hoc, Ignoring a common cause, and Oversimplified cause.
31
A selection of possibilities which is does not accurately represent the full range of true possibilities.
32
The fallacy where the occurrence of something after something else is used as proof of that thing causing what happened after. 'after this therefore because of this' "Every time Joshua catches a cold, he drinks a special infusion of herbs, gin ger and citrus fruits. A few days later, he always feels better. Obviously, the infusion helps cure his cold."
33
To attribute causation where there is merely correlation.
34
The idea that there is some independent connection between
causes and effects (logical or otherwise). It holds that causation is a fundamental feature of the world that exists independently of human observers.
35
To attribute an issue as caused by one problem when it is actually the result of a number of contributing problems.
36
The ultimate reality of an object, existing independently of our perception or knowledge
37
To ignore the shared reason of 2 things being correlated. Simply because X is correlated with Y, doesn’t mean X causes Y. There may be something else, Z, that causes both X and Y- being ignored.
38
A philosophical position that denies the existence of an objective, mind-independent causal structure in reality, viewing causal relations as subjective or constructed.
39
The philosophical position that we cannot have knowledge of a robust, necessary connection between a cause and its effect
40
To dismiss an idea or argument based on its origin, source, or history rather than its content.
41
A logical error where you attack the person making an argument instead of addressing the argument itself.
42
Argumentative play of deflating the objection, showing that it is a criticism that can equally be used against the attacker: ‘If your criticism is a good one, then we are both in on the wrongdoing.’ When it works, this is a powerful way of neutralizing objections.
43
An argument attempt to show that the position being criticized could mean one of a number of things, none of which is acceptable. Also known as 'two-pronged' or 'three pronged' dilemmas. Like catch 22s.
44
The error of concluding that a criticism is baseless just because the critic is himself guilty of it. Just because the pot calls the kettle black doesn’t mean that the kettle isn’t black.
45
X and Y are identical if and only if they share all the same properties.
46
The critical interpretation and explanation of a text to uncover the meaning intended by the author, rather than imposing one's own views
47
If a set of premises has the logical consequence that leads to something logically impossible, (square circles for instance) it shows it is impossible. Also known as "proof by contradiction"
48
Sense-dependent features like colour and smell. These are properties an object has only because the perceivers of those objects have a particular way of sensing them.
49
Seek to maximize the soundness of others’ arguments and truth of their claims by rendering them in the strongest way reasonable. (Steelmanning)
50
When an idea is no longer necessary for an explanation and can be cut out
51
Whatever else a philosophical explanation might do, it must account for the way things ‘seem like’ to us.
52
The reason we believe something to be the case, like someone might believe god is real, because they believe objective morality is real.
53
The properties objects have independently of how they are perceived.
These do not change according to the different senses of beings who perceive them.
54
Concepts which lack any objective value or foundation in reality.
55
That nothing is without a reason for why it is rather than is not. Often considered speculation.
56
An argument that, if taken to be sound, shows itself to be unsound.
57
The idea that only propositions that can be verified by reference to sensation are meaningful. On this view, much of metaphysics, theology and ethics is meaningless and should be cast off by philosophy. It is meaningless because its just linguistic junk like "blurplism"
58
information gained through sensory experience and empirical evidence, rather than pure reasoning
59
Things known to be true independently of (or logically prior to) particular experiences.
A priori knowledge like geometry work with objects like shapes, things that arnt objects in the real world.
They can be derived from reason alone, not deriving it from examining a real shape on earth.
60
A statement where the predicate is already contained within the concept of the subject, making the judgment true by definition and not requiring empirical experience to prove
61
A statement whose predicate adds new information not contained within the subject's concept
62
Thing the sentence is about "SNOW is white"
63
What is said about the thing the sentence is about "snow is WHITE"
64
You think that something is water and you judge that it boils
at 100 °C, you are making a synthetic judgement, since nothing in the mere
thought that something is water can tell you what its boiling point is.
65
A judgment that does not add anything to what is
included in the concept. Judgements about ideas already contained in an idea.
Often shown as a relation between a ‘subject’ (the thing the sentence is about) and ‘predicate’ (what is
said about the thing the sentence is about). The judgments as a whole do not go beyond what is already contained in the concepts that are the subject of the judgments
66
Logic were truth is identified merely as "it is true" or "it is false"
67
Logic where concepts of truth are accommodated to many "modalities" like temporal modaility (it is true at a period of time) logical modality (it is nessesarily true)
68
'of a thing' to mean a particular example of a thing seen, rather than the general.
"I want to buy a Porsche 911", my desire is de re if I have a particular car in mind, perhaps the one my neighbor is thinking of selling at a knock-down price. In particular.
69
'of what is said' to mean the general of the example type of thing, rather than one of the qualifying things in particular. "I want to buy a Porsche 911", my desire is de dicto if any Porsche 911 will do. Essentially, in general.
70
A belief, judgment, or inference is provisionally held but is open to revision or cancellation if new evidence emerges that contradicts it; corrigible.
71
Questions with a nested claim like "does your mom know your cringe?"
72
A belief which cannot be undone annulled or falsified.
73
To switch around the hypothesis and conclusion in a conditional statement. For "If P, then Q." the converse is "If Q, then P."
74
A statement where both it and its converse are both true. If the statement "If Q then P" and "If P, then Q" are both true, then it is this.
75
A statement where both the hypothesis and conclusion are both negated (X to not X). The converse of "If P, then Q" is "If not P, then Not Q"
76
A statement where both the hypothesis and conclusion are negated, and the hypothesis and conclusion are switched around. The contrapositive of "If P, then Q" is "If not Q, then not P"
77
Arranged or existing for the present, possibly to be changed later.
78
Logic that cares about how each concept entails another.
1. If green is a colour, then iron is an element.
2. Green is a colour.
3. Therefore, iron is an element. The Conclusion is not entailed, and it fails as an argument.
79
What follows if the antecedent is true. "If I get promoted, (I’ll do the bunny singing thing)"
80
If X, then Y.’ (Note that arguments can be cast as conditional statements where if the premises are true, then the conclusion is also true.)
81
What makes something what it is essentially; to formulate a thing’s essence therefore is to define it. Madonna's essence is that she is a human being.
82
A conjectural statement that guides an argument or investigation; it can be explored (and potentially proved or disproved) by examining data related to your topic.
83
A theory or opinion based on incomplete evidence, which serves as a starting point for investigation rather than a final conclusion.
84
A thing is most basically its form (eidos or morphos). While her essence is that she is a human being, her form is the physical structure of her body.
85
Properties which are not inherently somethings essence, but result from substance or form. Color, for example, is an accident, since it is not a substance but is a property of substances. Madonna’s accidents include her clothing styles, her public personae, haircuts and colours.
86
The view that the factors determining something, like the justification for a belief, are internal to a person's mind, such as their mental states, experiences, and reasons
87
That the head is not only where meanings, reasons, justifications or thoughts reside.
88
Things that must be the way they are.
Strict determinists see every event that has happened as necessary because it would not have been possible to be otherwise.
89
Claims that happen to be true or false but could be true
90
The idea that the meaning of a word or sentence depends on its relationships to a larger body of language, rather than having a meaning that can be understood in isolation. NO statement is immune to revision.
91
Statements have to be true or false.
Objections from events that haven't happened yet, may be one way or the other.
92
An idea that comprises all that is required for a thing to be an example of a thing.
93
Necessary conditions what is required for something to be the case.
94
Knowledge is always from a particular perspective and that thus there is no objectivity
95
An idea that comprises all that is required for a thing to be an example of a thing.
96
The view that physical objects exist independently of our own minds.
97
The view that statements are true or false independently of whether we know or believe them to be true.
Feedback
Relations of ideas vs matters of fact
Dialectical Materialism
Law of the excluded middle
Coherence epistemologists
Post hoc ergo propter hoc / post hoc fallacy
Cum hoc ergo propter hoc / cum hoc fallacy
Ignoring a common cause fallacy
Reductio ad impossible
The principle of Sufficient reason
Self-defeating argument
A posteriori knowledge
Biconditional Statement
Law of the excluded middle
Friedrich Nietzsche's Perspectivism
: an idea that comprises all that is required for a thing to be
Epistemological realism
|
Spanish alphabet, listening-based assessment