Top Banner
Introduction to Philosophy Evaluating Arguments Thought Experiments References Introduction to Philosophy Logic and Thought Experiments Carnegie Mellon University 9th September 2015
31

Introduction to Philosophy - · PDF fileIntroduction to Philosophy Evaluating Arguments Thought Experiments References Introduction to Philosophy Logic and Thought Experiments Carnegie

Mar 18, 2018

Download

Documents

donhi
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: Introduction to Philosophy - · PDF fileIntroduction to Philosophy Evaluating Arguments Thought Experiments References Introduction to Philosophy Logic and Thought Experiments Carnegie

Introductionto Philosophy

EvaluatingArguments

ThoughtExperiments

References Introduction to PhilosophyLogic and Thought Experiments

Carnegie Mellon University

9th September 2015

Page 2: Introduction to Philosophy - · PDF fileIntroduction to Philosophy Evaluating Arguments Thought Experiments References Introduction to Philosophy Logic and Thought Experiments Carnegie

Introductionto Philosophy

EvaluatingArguments

ThoughtExperiments

References

Writing Assignments and Readings

In this course we’re going to be doing a lot of reading. As perthe syllabus, you should be sure to complete the readingassigned before class on the day that it is due

The writing assignments ask you questions about the readingset on Monday and Wednesday, so you need to make sure to dothe reading to do well on the writing assignments

Page 3: Introduction to Philosophy - · PDF fileIntroduction to Philosophy Evaluating Arguments Thought Experiments References Introduction to Philosophy Logic and Thought Experiments Carnegie

Introductionto Philosophy

EvaluatingArguments

ThoughtExperiments

References

Lecture Notes

The slides from lectures are posted online. Go to the “CourseContent” tab on Blackboard and you’ll see a folder for themthere.

Page 4: Introduction to Philosophy - · PDF fileIntroduction to Philosophy Evaluating Arguments Thought Experiments References Introduction to Philosophy Logic and Thought Experiments Carnegie

Introductionto Philosophy

EvaluatingArguments

ThoughtExperiments

References

Aims for Today

To learn some important tools philosophers use:

1 Logic (used to evaluate arguments)

2 Thought experiments (used for all kinds of purposes!)

Page 5: Introduction to Philosophy - · PDF fileIntroduction to Philosophy Evaluating Arguments Thought Experiments References Introduction to Philosophy Logic and Thought Experiments Carnegie

Introductionto Philosophy

EvaluatingArguments

ThoughtExperiments

References

Evaluating Arguments

Page 6: Introduction to Philosophy - · PDF fileIntroduction to Philosophy Evaluating Arguments Thought Experiments References Introduction to Philosophy Logic and Thought Experiments Carnegie

Introductionto Philosophy

EvaluatingArguments

ThoughtExperiments

References

Terminology

In philosophy we care about arguments that can be given infavor of a position (more so than the position itself)

1 All raptors are terrifying

2 Blue is a raptor

3 Blue is terrifying

(1)–(2) are premises

(3) is the conclusion

Page 7: Introduction to Philosophy - · PDF fileIntroduction to Philosophy Evaluating Arguments Thought Experiments References Introduction to Philosophy Logic and Thought Experiments Carnegie

Introductionto Philosophy

EvaluatingArguments

ThoughtExperiments

References

Validity

When we say that an argument is valid we mean . . .

. . . that if its premises were true then its conclusion wouldhave to be true (Perry et al., 2015, 9)

Page 8: Introduction to Philosophy - · PDF fileIntroduction to Philosophy Evaluating Arguments Thought Experiments References Introduction to Philosophy Logic and Thought Experiments Carnegie

Introductionto Philosophy

EvaluatingArguments

ThoughtExperiments

References

Validity

1 All raptors are terrifying

2 Blue is a raptor

3 Blue is terrifying

This is a valid argument. If the premises are true, then theconclusion must be true.

Page 9: Introduction to Philosophy - · PDF fileIntroduction to Philosophy Evaluating Arguments Thought Experiments References Introduction to Philosophy Logic and Thought Experiments Carnegie

Introductionto Philosophy

EvaluatingArguments

ThoughtExperiments

References

Check Your Understanding

Take 30 seconds (or less) to think about this question:

Can a valid argument have a false conclusion?

Page 10: Introduction to Philosophy - · PDF fileIntroduction to Philosophy Evaluating Arguments Thought Experiments References Introduction to Philosophy Logic and Thought Experiments Carnegie

Introductionto Philosophy

EvaluatingArguments

ThoughtExperiments

References

Check Your Understanding

Can a valid argument have a false conclusion?

Yes!

1 All English prime ministers are squirrels

2 David Cameron is an English prime minister

3 David Cameron is a squirrel

If the premises were true then the conclusion would also haveto be true. But David Cameron is not a squirrel!

Page 11: Introduction to Philosophy - · PDF fileIntroduction to Philosophy Evaluating Arguments Thought Experiments References Introduction to Philosophy Logic and Thought Experiments Carnegie

Introductionto Philosophy

EvaluatingArguments

ThoughtExperiments

References

Check Your Understanding

Take 30 seconds (or less) to think about this question:

Can an invalid argument have a true conclusion?

Page 12: Introduction to Philosophy - · PDF fileIntroduction to Philosophy Evaluating Arguments Thought Experiments References Introduction to Philosophy Logic and Thought Experiments Carnegie

Introductionto Philosophy

EvaluatingArguments

ThoughtExperiments

References

Check Your Understanding

Can an invalid argument have a true conclusion?

Yes!

1 If Becky can vote then Becky is a US citizen

2 Becky cannot vote

3 Becky is not a US citizen

This is an invalid argument (do you remember what fallacy it isan instance of?) but the conclusion is true-I am not a UScitizen!

Page 13: Introduction to Philosophy - · PDF fileIntroduction to Philosophy Evaluating Arguments Thought Experiments References Introduction to Philosophy Logic and Thought Experiments Carnegie

Introductionto Philosophy

EvaluatingArguments

ThoughtExperiments

References

Soundness

When we say that an argument is sound we mean . . .

. . . that it is valid and has all true premises (Perry et al.,2015, 9)

An unsound argument is either invalid, or is valid but has atleast one false premise

Page 14: Introduction to Philosophy - · PDF fileIntroduction to Philosophy Evaluating Arguments Thought Experiments References Introduction to Philosophy Logic and Thought Experiments Carnegie

Introductionto Philosophy

EvaluatingArguments

ThoughtExperiments

References

Soundness

Example of a sound argument:

1 Every integer > 1 is either prime or the product of primefactors

2 5987 is an integer > 1

3 5987 is either prime or the product of prime factors

Page 15: Introduction to Philosophy - · PDF fileIntroduction to Philosophy Evaluating Arguments Thought Experiments References Introduction to Philosophy Logic and Thought Experiments Carnegie

Introductionto Philosophy

EvaluatingArguments

ThoughtExperiments

References

More Terminology

Sometimes arguments can fail to be valid (and thus fail to besound) but should not be dismissed as “bad” arguments

For example:

1 90% of visitors to Wikipedia only view content (i.e. theydon’t edit or create new material)

2 Jenny is a visitor to Wikipedia

3 Jenny only views content (and doesn’t edit or create newmaterial)

Arguments like the one above are said to be strong

Page 16: Introduction to Philosophy - · PDF fileIntroduction to Philosophy Evaluating Arguments Thought Experiments References Introduction to Philosophy Logic and Thought Experiments Carnegie

Introductionto Philosophy

EvaluatingArguments

ThoughtExperiments

References

Strength

When we call an argument strong we mean that it is invalid,but if all of its premises were true, then its conclusionwould probably be true

Strength can come in degrees

An invalid argument that is not strong is said to be weak

Page 17: Introduction to Philosophy - · PDF fileIntroduction to Philosophy Evaluating Arguments Thought Experiments References Introduction to Philosophy Logic and Thought Experiments Carnegie

Introductionto Philosophy

EvaluatingArguments

ThoughtExperiments

References

Weakness

Here’s an example of a weak argument:

1 10% of visitors to Wikipedia create or edit material

2 Jenny is a visitor to Wikipedia

3 Jenny creates or edits material

Page 18: Introduction to Philosophy - · PDF fileIntroduction to Philosophy Evaluating Arguments Thought Experiments References Introduction to Philosophy Logic and Thought Experiments Carnegie

Introductionto Philosophy

EvaluatingArguments

ThoughtExperiments

References

Cogency

We call an invalid argument cogent if it is strong and has alltrue premises

For example:

1 82% of Americans between the ages of 18 and 34 haveinternet access

2 Miley Cyrus is an American between the ages of 18 and 34

3 Miley Cyrus has internet access

Page 19: Introduction to Philosophy - · PDF fileIntroduction to Philosophy Evaluating Arguments Thought Experiments References Introduction to Philosophy Logic and Thought Experiments Carnegie

Introductionto Philosophy

EvaluatingArguments

ThoughtExperiments

References

Cogency

Here’s an example of an invalid argument that is not cogent:

1 82% of Americans between the ages of 18 and 34 haveinternet access

2 Madonna is an American between the ages of 18 and 34

3 Madonna has internet access

Why does it fail to be cogent?

Page 20: Introduction to Philosophy - · PDF fileIntroduction to Philosophy Evaluating Arguments Thought Experiments References Introduction to Philosophy Logic and Thought Experiments Carnegie

Introductionto Philosophy

EvaluatingArguments

ThoughtExperiments

References

Summary

When asked to evaluate an argument, keep these concepts inmind:

1 Validity

2 Soundness

3 Strength

4 Cogency

Page 21: Introduction to Philosophy - · PDF fileIntroduction to Philosophy Evaluating Arguments Thought Experiments References Introduction to Philosophy Logic and Thought Experiments Carnegie

Introductionto Philosophy

EvaluatingArguments

ThoughtExperiments

References

Thought Experiments

Page 22: Introduction to Philosophy - · PDF fileIntroduction to Philosophy Evaluating Arguments Thought Experiments References Introduction to Philosophy Logic and Thought Experiments Carnegie

Introductionto Philosophy

EvaluatingArguments

ThoughtExperiments

References

Thought Experiments

The runaway train scenarios we discussed last week wereexamples of thought experiments

When we conduct a thought experiment, we are engaging inhypothetical thinking

In the runaway train scenarios, we were trying to figure out the“right” thing to do

We also tried to figure out why most people thought the rightthing to do was pull the lever, but not to push the fat man

Page 23: Introduction to Philosophy - · PDF fileIntroduction to Philosophy Evaluating Arguments Thought Experiments References Introduction to Philosophy Logic and Thought Experiments Carnegie

Introductionto Philosophy

EvaluatingArguments

ThoughtExperiments

References

Thought Experiments

Philosophers are not the only people who make use of thoughtexperiments!

Scientists, such as Galileo and even Einstein, made use ofthought experiments in their work

Page 24: Introduction to Philosophy - · PDF fileIntroduction to Philosophy Evaluating Arguments Thought Experiments References Introduction to Philosophy Logic and Thought Experiments Carnegie

Introductionto Philosophy

EvaluatingArguments

ThoughtExperiments

References

The Infinitude of the Universe

Lucretius (who was a first century BC poet) tried to show thatthe Universe is infinite by using the following thoughtexperiment:

Suppose that the Universe has a boundary. Then we can throwa spear at the boundary. If the spear passes through the“boundary”, then it isn’t a real boundary. If the spear stops orbounces back at us, then there must be something on the otherside (in space) that is causing this. Thus, again, the“boundary” is not a real boundary. Consequently there is noboundary to the Universe and so it must be infinite.

Briefly discuss the above thought experiment with yourneighbor? Do you agree with Lucretius? Why or why not?

Page 25: Introduction to Philosophy - · PDF fileIntroduction to Philosophy Evaluating Arguments Thought Experiments References Introduction to Philosophy Logic and Thought Experiments Carnegie

Introductionto Philosophy

EvaluatingArguments

ThoughtExperiments

References

The Infinitude of the Universe?Lucretius’s thought experiment does not establish theconclusion he hoped it would!

We now know that there are spaces which are finite butunbounded

Simple example: a circle. If we move around the circumferencewe find no “edges” but it is a finite space

Page 26: Introduction to Philosophy - · PDF fileIntroduction to Philosophy Evaluating Arguments Thought Experiments References Introduction to Philosophy Logic and Thought Experiments Carnegie

Introductionto Philosophy

EvaluatingArguments

ThoughtExperiments

References

Moral of the Story

Lucretius’s example shows us that while thought experimentscan be powerful, they can also go wrong!

Some questions to ask when you’re presented with a thoughtexperiment:

• Does it make sense?

• Do we need additional info to draw a conclusion? If so,what info?

• What does the author use it to conclude? Can youreconstruct their argument? Is their argument “good”?

Page 27: Introduction to Philosophy - · PDF fileIntroduction to Philosophy Evaluating Arguments Thought Experiments References Introduction to Philosophy Logic and Thought Experiments Carnegie

Introductionto Philosophy

EvaluatingArguments

ThoughtExperiments

References

The Experience Machine

Suppose that there were an experience machine that wouldgive you any experience you desired. Super-duperneuropsychologists could stimulate your brain so that youwould think and feel you were writing a great novel, ormaking a friend, or reading an interesting book. All thetime you would be floating in a tank, with electrodesattached to your brain. Should you plug into this machinefor life, preprogramming your life experiences? [...] Ofcourse, while in the tank you won’t know you’re there;you’ll think that it’s all actually happening . . . (Nozick,1974)

Spend a few minutes discussing whether you would plug in(and more importantly, why or why not!) with your neighbor

Page 28: Introduction to Philosophy - · PDF fileIntroduction to Philosophy Evaluating Arguments Thought Experiments References Introduction to Philosophy Logic and Thought Experiments Carnegie

Introductionto Philosophy

EvaluatingArguments

ThoughtExperiments

References

Pleasure

We can try to use the experience machine thought experimentto argue against the claim that pleasure is the only thing thatmatters

1 If pleasure is the only thing that matters, then we wouldwant to plug into the experience machine

2 We do not want to plug into the experience machine

3 Pleasure is not the only thing that matters

Together with your neighbor, think about the followingquestions: Do you agree with the conclusion? If so, what otherthings do you think matter? If not, how would you criticize theargument?

Page 29: Introduction to Philosophy - · PDF fileIntroduction to Philosophy Evaluating Arguments Thought Experiments References Introduction to Philosophy Logic and Thought Experiments Carnegie

Introductionto Philosophy

EvaluatingArguments

ThoughtExperiments

References

Other Thought Experiments

The Missing Shade of Blue: You’ve not seen a particular shadeof blue, but you’ve seen shades slightly darker and slightlylighter. Can you imagine the missing shade in between?

Memory Swap: Imagine you and your neighbor swappedmemories. Who would be who?

Duplicate People: Two exact duplicates of Captain Sisko arecreated by DS9’s transporter instead of just one. Are they bothCaptain Sisko? Is one the “real” Sisko? Are neither the “real”Sisko?

Page 30: Introduction to Philosophy - · PDF fileIntroduction to Philosophy Evaluating Arguments Thought Experiments References Introduction to Philosophy Logic and Thought Experiments Carnegie

Introductionto Philosophy

EvaluatingArguments

ThoughtExperiments

References

Exit Ticket

Select one of the thought experiments that we discussed todayand say what you would conclude from it.

Please give a brief description of the thought experiment so weknow which one you mean (e.g. “the one where you have todecide whether to “plug in” to a machine that gives youpleasurable experiences”)

Page 31: Introduction to Philosophy - · PDF fileIntroduction to Philosophy Evaluating Arguments Thought Experiments References Introduction to Philosophy Logic and Thought Experiments Carnegie

Introductionto Philosophy

EvaluatingArguments

ThoughtExperiments

References

Bibliography

R. Nozick. Anarchy, State, and Utopia. Basic Books, 1974.

J. Perry, M. Bratman, and J. Fischer. Logical toolkit. InJ. Perry, M. Bratman, and J. Fischer, editors, Introductionto Philosophy: Classical and Contemporary Issues, pages8–13. 2015.