Anda di halaman 1dari 7

INTFILO

 WHAT IS PHILOSOPHY?
1. It is an academic discipline in which we study the principles and examine our way of life-how we conduct
our daily living and how we choose to behave. In this field, we use REASONING in order to check the
reality and if it jires with the present situation/lifestyle.
2. Many definitions that may contradict each other.
1. – School of existentialism- nature of existence/human existence
2. School of Analytical Philosophy- analysis of the concept/real meaning.
3. The TRIUMPH OF LOGOS over MYTHOS
Logos- reason/truth ; Mythos=emotion
4. It uses the VERACITY OF INDUCTION.

The word PHILOSOPHY came from the words FILIA that means LOVE and SOFIA meaning wisdom. It is a
SUBJECT MATTER that DEALS with FUNDAMENTAL/ULTIMATE QUESTIONS with the use of
REASON/RATIONALITY. It can also be considered as the MASTER INQUIRY because it can also be found in all
fields of study. It uses the VERACITY OF INDUCTION meaning it not just accepts answers but also examine
and ask its trust-worthiness.

 INDUCTION VS. DEDUCTION


INDUCTION is used by almost all fields of study/sciences. In this kind of reasoning, you do not question the
veracity and will always have an element of uncertainty.

A deductive argument claims that its premises make its conclusion certain. In contrast, an inductive argument
claims that its premises merely make its conclusion probable. While deduction gives absolute proof, it never
makes contact with the real world, there is no place for observation or experimentation, no way to test the
validity of the premises. And, while induction is driven by observation, it never approaches actual proof of a
theory.

 ETYMOLOGY- science that seeks out the roots of words.


 Early Greek philosophers DID NOT REJECT pre-philosophical thought. Most scholars agree that the term
mythos was not regarded ngatively but merely meant “story” with no reference to any truth content.

THERE AND BACK AGAIN

1. THE OLYMPIAN GODS

The world was explained and understood in terms of activities and moods of gods and goddesses.

Members of the Greek Pantheon


*PROTOGENOI (first born gods)- Nyx (Night), Ouranos (Sky Dome), Gaia (Earth)
* NYMPHAI (nature spirits)
*DAIMONES- Hypnos(sleep) , Phobos (fear), Thanatos (Death)
*HERO-HEMETOI (semi-divine heroes)- Theseus, Perseus, Achilles
* OLYMPIAN GODS- Zeus, Hera, Poseidon, Demeter, Artemis, Apollo, Ares, Athena,
Aphrodite, Hepaistos, Hermes, Dionysos (Hades)
“If it rained and thundered, Zeus was angry. If the Earth quaked, Poseidon was complaining. Instances
of intoxication were attributed to Dionysos. The changing of seasons was attributed to Demeter. All
cures for illness and sacrificial offering to the god Apollo.”
 The Homeric poems were already an organized version of the oral folk mythology that people believed in
and which guided their day-to-day lives. This was considered a TRIUMPH of the IONIA, from which our first
philosophers came from.
 IONIA – The most imaginative,intellectual, advanced in knowledge in Greece before the rise of Athens.

2. PRE-SOCRATIC (500 B.C.)

“What is reality and what it is made of?’’

1. THALES of MILETUS (6th century BC) * FATHER OF PHILOSOPHY


“The earth floated on WATER, and that water is the principle of all things or the world’s basic element.
Everything, then, was seen as having come from and ultimately dissolving in water.”
* First to attempt to ask the fundamental question “WHAT IS THE WORLD MADE OF”.
* He came from MILETUS, and that the Milesian’s patron god was Poseidon.
* He was in fact paying homage to POSEIDON in proclaiming that water was the basic stuff of the world.
(Indian myths- floating gold egg; Norse mythology- ice melting; African myths-watery, formless chaos; Egyptian myths- Watery abyss; Japan-
“vast, oily sea of chaos that contained a mix of all the elements”; Native America-“there was nothing but water and darkness.”)
 “Everything is full of gods.”= he was still very much within the parameters of the mythic language that pervaded his time.

2. ANAXIMENES of MILETUS
“Something more primordial than water was the basic stuff, AIR.”
* Remains an archaic concept because it ca also be traced to the Homeric “breath’’/ life-soul.

3. ANAXIMANDER of MILETUS
“The basic stuff was not some single element, but rather, a boundless/indefinite nature-the apeiron. This
contained all things but since all things, if existing together, would cancel put each other, the apeiron
existed as an empty pletinude until Time did the order of things.”
* Air= Aperon
* The universe was governed by a system of justice, reminiscent of the FATES.

4. XENOPHANES of COLOPHON
“This failure in the moral expurgatiuon was deepened by a failure in the attempt to bring intellectual
order into the welter of primitive gods.’”
* Xenophanes’disgust of the Homeric gods had more to do with the fact that they acted immorally.
* Together with PARMINIDES, started veering toward the IDEA OF UNITY=MONOTHEISM.

“Is reality permanent?’’


5. HERACLITUS of EPHESUS “THE OBSCURE.’’
“Everything is in a state of flux.”
 Everything changes
 Fire is the physis because in the presence of fire, everything is transformed into something else.”’
 potamôi tôi autôi =“It is impossible to step into the same river twice.”
 “HOW CAN SOMETHING BE KNOWN IF EVERYTHING CHANGES.”
 Reality does not exist, it flows, and beings are an illusion upon the flow.

ONTOLOGY- Study of being


BEING- State of permanence; all reality; everthing that exists
IDENTITY- something that remains the same
**RATIONALISM- doctrine in philosophy that caters to the belief that the acquisition of knowledge is through the use of
reason ONLY.

6. PARMENIDES of ELEA
“Non-being cannot exist/ All change was illusion.”
 If everything is identical to being and being is a category of the same thing then there can be neither differences
between things nor any change. To be different, or to change, would amount to becoming or being non-being;
that is, not existing. Therefore being is a homogeneous and non-differentiated sphere and the appearance of
beings is illusory.
 Knowledge is attained only through rational thought because sensory experience provides only illusion.
 In "the way of truth", he explains how reality (coined as "what-is") is one, change is impossible, and existence is
timeless, uniform, necessary, and unchanging. In "the way of opinion," he explains the world of appearances, in
which one's sensory faculties lead to conceptions which are false and deceitful.

3. SOCRATIC PERIOD

“What can humans know and how can they know it?’’
1. SOCRATES (280 BC)
“An unexamined life is not worth living./Know thyself”
 He is the wisest because he is the only one who knows that he knows nothing.
 He did not leave any writings and is admired by his student, Plato.
 Jobless, paripathetic
 He sought genuine knowledge rather than mere victory over an opponent, and employed the same logical tricks
developed by the Sophists to a new purpose, the pursuit of truth.
 He loves to use dialectical method, often involving a discussion in which the defense of one point of view is
questioned. =Socratic method
 He was charged with a crime of CORRUPTING THE YOUTH and was sentenced to death.
 “THE UNDERSTANDING OF ESSENCES CONSTITUTED KNOWLEDGE AND THE GOAL OF LIFE WAS TO GAIN
KNOWLEDGE. WHEN ONE’S CONDUCT IS GUIDED BY KNOWLEDGE, IT IS NECESSARY MORAL.”
 Unlike the other philosophers, he was more concerned mainly with what it means to be a human and the
problems of human existence.

2. PLATO (427-347 BC)


“Do not trust your senses for they do not give you the true intimation of things.”
 Student of Socrates who uses his teacher’s name while sharing his own ideas.
 He wished to find an something permanent that could be the object of knowledge.
 He was a rationalist

THE DIALOGUES- The Republic, The Symposium, The Pheaus, The Timeus.
THE REPUBLIC
" We only reach the ideal state when kings are philosophers and philosophers are kings."
 The ideal state of Plato

EPISTEMOLOGY
 "epistimate" - to know; it deals with the theories of knowledge.

SOPHISTS- pretenders of truth

THE ALLIGORY OF THE CAVE (full of symbolisms)


Back then, there was a cave with prisoners since birth and they are chained with each other, facing on the wall.
They can only see things because of the sunset that produces the shadows. For them, SHADOWS were real but in
reality. it was only an illusion. They believe that "It's a world of shadows.". One day, one prisoner was able to break the
chain and was able to see the real world. When he decided to go back to tell his colleagues about this, his co-prisoners
concluded that he is going crazy. (Prisoners=us)

PLATO's EPISTEMOLOGY
consists of two opposing realities
CONTRADICTORY- one negates the other

WORLD OF IDEAS/FORMS (upper world)


 The place where you can find true being/form
 Object of thoughts (IMMATERIAL)-can only be perceived by the intellect/mind.
 Things are permanent and things are truly real.
 [ All of the originals are permanent ]
 Mathematics, Geometry

WORLD OF ILLUSIONS/shadows (lower world)


 Everything is on flux
 NOT REAL/ NOT PERMANENT
 [The world is self-perceived/ Whatever you can perceive using your senses is not real.]
 Why not real? EVERYTHING CHANGES. (MATERIAL THINGS)
 copies/duplicates
 3D objects

THE THREE FINGERS (The Republic)


" Your senses cannot give you reality."
Observe your hand. Take the three fingers Compare the three. For instance, is your ring finger long or short? If
you say long, compare it with your middle finger. If you say short, compare it with your small finger. This only proves
that there is no permanence when we perceive with our senses, therefore, it is not real.

3+ 2= 5 -> self-evident knowledge


God exists? -> it has a barrier
UFO's exists? -> You need to go and check reality.
Christianity- an echo of Plato's epistemology

"All things you see has an original."

 chair (material) vs. CHAIR (immaterial)

"Christianity is platonism for the people." -Fredrich Wilhelm Nieasche


FUNDAMENTAL QUESTIONS

 "WHAT IS KNOWLEDGE?"
"Knowledge is PERMANENT and CERTAIN."

 "WHAT CAN I KNOW?"


"Mathematical/Geometrical truths"

 "HOW CAN I KNOW?"


"Through the use of reason."

LOGIC, ARGUMENTS, FALLACIES

 LOGIC- study of the methods and principles used to distinguish good reasoning from bad reasoning.
 ARGUMENT - a piece of reasoning expressed in words or symbols.
- Must-have atleast one premise and one conclusion.
 CONCLUSION - position or stand that a person takes regarding an issue.
( therefore, thus, hence, accordingly, for this reason, in consequence, proves that, it follows that, which points to the fact that.)
 PREMISE - supports or evidences given for the position that one takes regarding an issue.
( because, since, for, as, as shown by, follows from, in as much as, as indicated by.)
 ENTHYMEME - an argument with an unstated premise/conclusion/both/but not missing. It has true value
whether true or false.
“All propositions are sentences but not all sentences are prepositions.”
 VALIDITY - structure of the arguments
 SOUNDNESS- all premises must be true, argument is valid.
 FALLACY - false/mistake in reasoning
 FORMAL FALLACY - one’s conclusion could be false, even if one’s premises are true. [structure is wrong.]
 INFORMAL FALLACY- It may be due to the inappropriateness of its premises/some ambiguity in the language.

INFORMAL FALLACIES
 FALLACY OF RELEVANCE- essentially psychologically compelling.
1. ARGUMENTUM AD BACULUM/ APPEAL TO FORCE- mode of persuasion that uses force, threats against a
person’s security as instruments of persuasion to achieve compliance of the desired action.

2. APPEAL TO ADVANTAGE- will not do something unless the advantage proferred was given.
Pascal’s wager- “one should believe in God because, if there is a God, such belief would insure eternal
life, while if there is no God, one loses nothing.’’

3. ARGUMENTUM AD HOMINEM (abusive)- attacking the person and not the argument/ name-calling.

4. AD HOMINEM (circumstancial)- attacking the person’s circumstances instead of his arguments.

5. ARGUMENTUM AD MISERICORDIAM (Appeal to pity) – This fallacy is committed when appeals to


pity/sympathy for the purpose of securing a desired conclusion.

6. ARGUMENTUM AD VERECUNDIAM (Appeal to authority)- If one expert cites a third against another WHILE
IGNORING the FACTS AND THE LOGIC OF THE CASE,or if one cites the opinion of an questionable authority then
this fallacy is committed.

7. ARGUMENTUM AD POPULUM (Appeal to the people) – persuasion is largely accomplished by the heavy use
of rhetoric, highly emotional language, appeal to sentiments, prejudices, and weaknesses of the people.

8. ARGUMENTUM AD IGNORANTIAM (Appeal to ignorance) – one is true unless proven false or one is false
unless proven true; no evidence therefore does not exist.
9. ACCIDENT- This fallacy is committed when one applies a general rule to exceptional cases.
Example: Jogging is good for the health, therefore a person with a heart disease can improve his health by jogging.

10. CONVERSE ACCIDENT- It consists in applying a rule true of exceptional cases to the rest.
Example: What is good for babies must be good for all persons; including adults.

11. ARGUING FROM INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE- The fallacy is committed when a person makes a conclusion with
haste maybe because of certain biases.
Example: A must be good in math because he scored the highest in history.

12. HASTY GENERALIZATION- The fallacy is committed when one argues that what is true of a few members of
a class must be also true to all members of the class. (stereotyping, racial profiling)
Example: After seeing some good tennis players from X University, one concludes that all students from X
university are good tennis players.

13. FALSE CAUSE- Attributing a cause to a particular effect which is not supported by science/not even found in
nature.
Example: Blaming; miracles=novena

14. POST HOC ERGO PROPTER HOC (after this, therefore, because of this)- Some event happened after another
event, therefore, the former event must have been caused by the latter event.
Example: supertitious belief

15. PETITIO PRINCIPII (Begging the question, arguing in circles)- This fallacy is committed when one is covertly
assuming in the premise the fact that needs to be proved in the conclusion.
Example: God exists. Proof? It is written in the bible. Why should I believe the Bible? Because it’s the word of God.

16. ASSUMPTION WITHOUT PROOF- Thisconsists in assuming as true without proof some premise/s in an
argument.
Example: “Since our race is superior to yours, we have the right to dominate your country.”

17. LOADED QUESTION/COMPLEX QUESTION- a question which assumes something without proof.
Example: “Have you stopped cheating?’

18. FALSE/MISLEADING PREMISES- This fallacy is committed by a person who intentionally/unintentionally


argues on the basis of premises which are known to be false; used to gain advantage.
Example: If the streets are wet, it has rained recently, The streets are wet. Therefore it has rained recently.

19. SPECIAL PLEADING- This fallacy consists in ‘’pleading’’ only evidence in favor of or against a case and
suppressing evidence contrary to it.
Example: A salesman may give all the advantages of buying his product, but remain silent about its disadvantages.

20. HYPOTHESIS CONTRARY TO FACT- ‘’what-ifs”; If hypothesis were true, a particular conclusion would follow.
Example: “If Rizal were alive today, then he would surely be a human rights fighter.”

21. A FORTIORI-Because a certain amount of something leads to a certain quantity of (good or bad) results,
more of the same will lead to a greater quantity of the same results.
Example: “If Y can do 20 units of work in one day, he may be able todo proportionately more in two hours.
 FALLACY OF AMBIGUITY- confusion of language/ unclear/vague