Intro to Philosophy Ryan UNIT 2 STUDY QUESTIONS 1 Why did Descartes choose the method of doubt in order to determine what we can know If you can t doubt something we don t know it If you have x you know it s there so how could you doubt it We know the certainly because they can t be doubted Using this method what do we discover can be doubted Everything cannot be doubted what we can sense Senses are only perceptions and they can t truly be trusted if it lies it must be doubted What can t be doubted is mathematics physics external work What is the one thing incapable of doubt Explain why this is so Cogito ergo sum I think therefore I am cannot be doubted at all Thing I is the one doing the doubting therefore it does exist How from this one bare fact can we use reason to show how we can know things external to our own minds Deconstructive Project the single thing that cannot be doubted the true existence Idea of perfection but we know that we are far from it so there is a higher power that put that perfect idea in our head because we only see perceptions of imperfect objects nothing is really perfect God perfect all knowing powerful being idea came from something imperfect Could be a conception that doesn t exactly exists a defect would mean non existence of perfection Omnibenevolent all good free from any bad evil God presents the perfect world Ontological Argument all things were created placed here by the one perfect thing God An unlimited being is the embodiment of all perfections It is more perfect to exist than to not exist Therefore this unlimited being necessarily exists This unlimited being God 2 State Moore s proof of an external world Here is a hand here s another hand external thing exist What three conditions must any argument meet in order to be considered a sound argument and how does Moore justify that his argument does so 1 Premises Conclusions must be different circular argument premises can be false conclusions can be true 2 I must know the premises to be true here s a hand aside from what the skeptics say here is the hand 3 Conclusion must follow from premise hand doesn t exist in the mind it is external to your mind even though it is on body What does Moore admit he has not been able to prove at the end of his argument He admits you cannot prove premises one can know it is true but can t prove it It would be impossible to prove every single object because you would never ever get to a conclusion attempting to prove every premise for the next conclusion and so on Give one reason why this might be unsatisfactory and another as to why it could be satisfactory If you doubt existence of the external world you will be unsatisfied forever Satisfactory because even though a skeptic will never be impressed by these arguments you will always hold truth and belief that everything you perceive in the external world is what it is 3 What is the difference between direct and representational realism Direct Realism Moore world come just as it is hand hand the way it appears is the way that it is Representational Realism Russell appearance vs realities Table example perceptions from physical viewpoint can change and we only perceive representation of an appearance What does Russell mean by the distinction between appearance and reality We don t know if what we see is really there talking about our external world to our body mind Appearance is what we see from our point of view white spot on table Reality is what it actually is glare reflection from light sun Cite an example that demonstrates that what we perceive are appearances rather than realities The light on the table being a reflection from light or a table looking like a diamond rather than rectangle because of our point of view Why according to Russell can t we rely on the testimony of others to discover the nature of realities We cannot trust what someone else perceives because it is their perceptions not ours and what they see to be real may be different than what we perceive State the cat argument Russell provides to show that we probably have at least some knowledge of the external world Simplest ideas If a cat moves when I m turned around is it a different multiplied cat did it teleport When I feed it then I leave and it s hungry again when I come back did it cease to exist while I wasn t there to perceive it Something doesn t come in and out of existence just because you weren t there to perceive it 4 Explain Hume s theory of sense impressions and the correlate that simple ideas combine into complex ideas Hume Empiricist Simple idea color shape movement etc brown wooden rectangular all characteristics perceived of an object don t come at once Complex ideas Bundle Theory they all come together in the mind Perception of the object brown wooden rectangular DOOR How must they be related in order to do this must be arranged spatially temporally What according to Hume does this tell us about the nature of the mind independent world Doesn t tell us anything about the external world sense perceptions are mind independent Imagination known continued existence with imagination Explain the inescapable oscillation this drives us to Oscillation moving back and forth between vulgar mind independence mind in the real world philosophy 5 How according to Kant do rationalism and empiricism each contribute to what has become the scandal of philosophy Correspondence Theory relates to the scandal for Rationalist matter of personal view taste Empiricist all we have is sense perception only in mind no right no proof Kant believed no way to get to external world How do we combine elements of both in order in transcendental idealism to rescue objective knowledge knowledge of objects Kant says you need both intellect sense Paradigms aren t justified in mind in divergent world Transcendental Idealism human experience of this is similar to the way they appear to us Pursuant to this explain the function of the following sensible conditions time and space intellectual conditions substance relation cause effect RATIONALIST EMPIRICIST Without Time Space no sense perceptions Cause Effect Relations only exist through senses empiricists view Substance matter anything but only intellect rationalists view 6 Cite two problems with Kant s philosophy and how did Hegel correct them 1 Where does the intellect come from and he doesn t know where sense comes from what are we even sensing to get to the object 2 Kant says knowledge of object doesn t come
View Full Document
Unlocking...