18. In your own words, explain Cartesian dualism and how it gives rise to the mind-body problem.
- This idea of Cartesian dualism seems a bit far fetched. I dont even know how someone can argue that physical matter cant be felt in reality. Hah its beyond me...
19. In your own words, explain and evaluate Descartes's solution to the mind-body problem.
- Again, I dont know how Descartes can seriously try to logically prove that the mind and body function independently. Its hard for me to see. And probably most other people...
20. In your own words, explain and evaluate the arguments for and against physicalism (or materialism).
- Physicalism is basically matter or objects (Rocks, etc..) I think if you combine the two then matter can be (smelled, seen, tasted, etc) by the other senses.
Monday, May 11, 2009
Decartes Part 2
11. Explain Descartes's philosophical method and his justification for that method.
- Descartes was an expert in Mathematics; that being said, he applied various concepts of mathematics to his philosophical ideas structure. I think one of Descartes' greatest strengths was that he never assumed anything, due to this practice he always had concrete foundation because he started off with a certain fact.
12. Explain Descartes's arguments why the senses cannot be the foundation of knowledge.
- Descartes believed that sens cannot be the foundation of knowledge. This is mainly attributed to the Evil Genius doubt. He believes everyone is given "flawed cognitive faculties," (which, ironically, I am assuming he means sense) therefore senses cannot be the foundation of knowledge.
13. Explain exactly why Descartes, a rationalist, cannot use mathematics as a foundation for knowledge.
- Descartes believed that his senses would be fooling him. Descartes is a complicated dude.. haha
14. Explain Descartes's famous "Cogito ergo sum" argument.
- "Cogito ergo sum" means I think therefore, I am (exist). Descartes assumed nothing. The one thing he knew was absolutely true was that he existed. He knew this because of his ability to think.
15. Explain how Descartes uses wax to establish the existence of an innate idea.
- He basically got a piece of wax and described it using sensory information. However when that wax is heated up and melted, you can no longer use that sensory information correctly and describe it as wax. The only way to know this for sure is to use its "intrinsic source."
16. Explain Descartes's "concept of perfection" argument against the existence of the evil genius.
- According to Descartes, a perfect being doesn't exist. If one did, according to Descartes' philosophy, i think we would not have "flawed cognitive faculties."
17. Explain Descartes's argument for the existence of the physical world.
- Im not sure about this one, but it seems as though, Descartes contradicts himself. That the physical world doesnt exist because our senses can be tricked into believing there is one. Then says that there is a physical world, using sensory information, saying that it could be reliable at times. This is very frusterating, whos to distinguish between what sensory information could be reliable and some unreliable.
- Descartes was an expert in Mathematics; that being said, he applied various concepts of mathematics to his philosophical ideas structure. I think one of Descartes' greatest strengths was that he never assumed anything, due to this practice he always had concrete foundation because he started off with a certain fact.
12. Explain Descartes's arguments why the senses cannot be the foundation of knowledge.
- Descartes believed that sens cannot be the foundation of knowledge. This is mainly attributed to the Evil Genius doubt. He believes everyone is given "flawed cognitive faculties," (which, ironically, I am assuming he means sense) therefore senses cannot be the foundation of knowledge.
13. Explain exactly why Descartes, a rationalist, cannot use mathematics as a foundation for knowledge.
- Descartes believed that his senses would be fooling him. Descartes is a complicated dude.. haha
14. Explain Descartes's famous "Cogito ergo sum" argument.
- "Cogito ergo sum" means I think therefore, I am (exist). Descartes assumed nothing. The one thing he knew was absolutely true was that he existed. He knew this because of his ability to think.
15. Explain how Descartes uses wax to establish the existence of an innate idea.
- He basically got a piece of wax and described it using sensory information. However when that wax is heated up and melted, you can no longer use that sensory information correctly and describe it as wax. The only way to know this for sure is to use its "intrinsic source."
16. Explain Descartes's "concept of perfection" argument against the existence of the evil genius.
- According to Descartes, a perfect being doesn't exist. If one did, according to Descartes' philosophy, i think we would not have "flawed cognitive faculties."
17. Explain Descartes's argument for the existence of the physical world.
- Im not sure about this one, but it seems as though, Descartes contradicts himself. That the physical world doesnt exist because our senses can be tricked into believing there is one. Then says that there is a physical world, using sensory information, saying that it could be reliable at times. This is very frusterating, whos to distinguish between what sensory information could be reliable and some unreliable.
Thursday, April 2, 2009
DESCARTES!!!
1. The Wikipedia article unfortunately fails to correctly interpret the quotation in which Descartes says "I firmly believed that in this way I should much better succeed in the conduct of my life, that if I build only upon the old foundations, and leaned upon principles which, in my youth, I had taken on trust." How does Wikipedia interpret this quote? What is the correct interpretation of this quote, based on a close reading of what it actually says? (This is a hit-or-miss kind of question, so I won't mind if you skip it.)
- Since this is a hit or miss question, i dont mind taking a crack at it: Wiki seems like they reinterpreted it verbatim, it seems with your use of "fails to correctly interpret.." that this is not a correct interpretation of this quote. The correct interpretation may be, It would better serve him to doubt everything and all the training he had had was built on "swampy" foundation. So he took elements of his own education and tested them till they were undoubtable. i dunno if this is correct, but i took a crack at it...
2. Explain the four precepts by which Descartes seeks to discover true knowledge. (Just FYI, Descartes does not mean to suggest anything to do with the senses by the term "clear and distinct.")
- The four precepts are:
a. Accept only that which you are sure of
b. Divide into as small parts as necessary
c. Solve the simplest problems first
d. Make as complete lists as posible
I guess all of these four precepts are needed to discover true knowlege. Without one, your knowledge would be incomplete. This first one, Accept only that which you are sure of, is pretty straightforward, dont take something that you havent researched yourself as fact. Second, Divide into as small parts as necessary, this enables a person to examine an issue from all angles and down to the minute detail. Third, Solve the simplest problem first, this is smart becuase you'll save tons of time, and it would serve as an appetizer for your brain to get started witht he meat of the problem. Fourth, Make as complete lists as possible, this helps you organize your thoughts so that you dont confuse yourself. My interpretation maybe false but i think that its pretty straightforward.
3. According to Shorto, what is the relationship between religion and the scientific method?
- Shorto believes that the scientific method was created in order to overthrow the religious method.
4. According to Shorto, what great controversy continues to the present day?
- The controversy that ignited by Descartes and continues today is, along the lines of: Islamic terrorists spurn the modern world and pine for a culture based on unquestioning faith; where scientists write bestsellers that passionately make the case for atheism; where others struggle to find a balance between faith and reason."
5. What was threatened by Descartes' method, and how was it threatened?
- The Church was threatened by Descartes' method (Cartesianism). I think that it was threatend because of democracy and science when the Church represented the opposite of that.
6. The Book Lady talks about a conflict between modernity and traditionalism. As best you can come up explain what you think she means by "modernity." If your idea of modernity is different from hers, explain your idea as well.
- I think that by modernity she means reason and by tradition she means religtion. I guess she referes to reason as modernity because of the way people thought during modern times as opposed to the conservative closed minded tradtionalists. I suppose i can agree with her reffering to modernity as reason because the modern era is more openminded and reasonable than the conservatives who believe in something with absolute faith, no matter what reason points at.
7. What does Shorto think is the proposal contained in "The Discourse on the Method for Rightly Conducting the Reason?"
- Shorto thinks that it is a "modest" proposal ground knowledge not on received wisdom from the Bible or kingly power but on human reason.
8. Although Shorto does not mention it in the article, the Discourse was written in French, a language spoken by pretty much everyone in France, and not in Latin, a language spoken by scholars, a very small proportion of the population who almost never discuss their work with people who were not scholars. What do you think the social effect might have been of writing this book in French rather than Latin?
- Well with any language, things are lost in translation, and i think that was probably the biggest thing back then. And as for social effect, i guess the scholars might have considered it a slap in the face, that this book was translated into French. I dunno, its the best i could come up with.
9. What is Shorto's own interpretation of Descartes' importance in forming the modern world? What, if anything, is Shorto's argument for his interpretation?
- Shorto's own interpretation of Descartes' importance in forming the world was that he was creating a world in which you could understand things without faith.
10. Based on all the reading you have done for this unit, what is your opinion of Shorto's view of Descartes, and of Shorto's argument, if any?
- Shorto's view of Descarte is an accurate one, i think. Some of his ideas may be compromised because he is only looking at it from one angle: to write his book. I think that in order to fully understand descarte one has to disect his beliefs and look at the without any sort of bias or end game.
- Since this is a hit or miss question, i dont mind taking a crack at it: Wiki seems like they reinterpreted it verbatim, it seems with your use of "fails to correctly interpret.." that this is not a correct interpretation of this quote. The correct interpretation may be, It would better serve him to doubt everything and all the training he had had was built on "swampy" foundation. So he took elements of his own education and tested them till they were undoubtable. i dunno if this is correct, but i took a crack at it...
2. Explain the four precepts by which Descartes seeks to discover true knowledge. (Just FYI, Descartes does not mean to suggest anything to do with the senses by the term "clear and distinct.")
- The four precepts are:
a. Accept only that which you are sure of
b. Divide into as small parts as necessary
c. Solve the simplest problems first
d. Make as complete lists as posible
I guess all of these four precepts are needed to discover true knowlege. Without one, your knowledge would be incomplete. This first one, Accept only that which you are sure of, is pretty straightforward, dont take something that you havent researched yourself as fact. Second, Divide into as small parts as necessary, this enables a person to examine an issue from all angles and down to the minute detail. Third, Solve the simplest problem first, this is smart becuase you'll save tons of time, and it would serve as an appetizer for your brain to get started witht he meat of the problem. Fourth, Make as complete lists as possible, this helps you organize your thoughts so that you dont confuse yourself. My interpretation maybe false but i think that its pretty straightforward.
3. According to Shorto, what is the relationship between religion and the scientific method?
- Shorto believes that the scientific method was created in order to overthrow the religious method.
4. According to Shorto, what great controversy continues to the present day?
- The controversy that ignited by Descartes and continues today is, along the lines of: Islamic terrorists spurn the modern world and pine for a culture based on unquestioning faith; where scientists write bestsellers that passionately make the case for atheism; where others struggle to find a balance between faith and reason."
5. What was threatened by Descartes' method, and how was it threatened?
- The Church was threatened by Descartes' method (Cartesianism). I think that it was threatend because of democracy and science when the Church represented the opposite of that.
6. The Book Lady talks about a conflict between modernity and traditionalism. As best you can come up explain what you think she means by "modernity." If your idea of modernity is different from hers, explain your idea as well.
- I think that by modernity she means reason and by tradition she means religtion. I guess she referes to reason as modernity because of the way people thought during modern times as opposed to the conservative closed minded tradtionalists. I suppose i can agree with her reffering to modernity as reason because the modern era is more openminded and reasonable than the conservatives who believe in something with absolute faith, no matter what reason points at.
7. What does Shorto think is the proposal contained in "The Discourse on the Method for Rightly Conducting the Reason?"
- Shorto thinks that it is a "modest" proposal ground knowledge not on received wisdom from the Bible or kingly power but on human reason.
8. Although Shorto does not mention it in the article, the Discourse was written in French, a language spoken by pretty much everyone in France, and not in Latin, a language spoken by scholars, a very small proportion of the population who almost never discuss their work with people who were not scholars. What do you think the social effect might have been of writing this book in French rather than Latin?
- Well with any language, things are lost in translation, and i think that was probably the biggest thing back then. And as for social effect, i guess the scholars might have considered it a slap in the face, that this book was translated into French. I dunno, its the best i could come up with.
9. What is Shorto's own interpretation of Descartes' importance in forming the modern world? What, if anything, is Shorto's argument for his interpretation?
- Shorto's own interpretation of Descartes' importance in forming the world was that he was creating a world in which you could understand things without faith.
10. Based on all the reading you have done for this unit, what is your opinion of Shorto's view of Descartes, and of Shorto's argument, if any?
- Shorto's view of Descarte is an accurate one, i think. Some of his ideas may be compromised because he is only looking at it from one angle: to write his book. I think that in order to fully understand descarte one has to disect his beliefs and look at the without any sort of bias or end game.
Hobbes - "Blogging Questions
61. Explain Hobbes's view of human nature as completely as you can. What was Hobbes's model of a human being? For Hobbes, how did human motivation work? Given this model of motivation, what kind of behaviors should we expect from unregulated human beings?
- Hobbes believed that human nature was based upon our needs, if we were cold, our reaction would be to warm ourselves up.. if we were hungry, our action would be to eat. Our entire nature is based up on pleasure and pain, we do things mainly to get rid of a physical discomfort we may have. Its almost as if we are motivated by our next meal or motivated to satisfy our next need. We are built that way. Our actions are almost "mechanical" in the way we go about things, so very predictable.
62. For Hobbes, how is human nature related to human behavior in the state of nature? Given his model of human nature and motivation, how would we expect human beings to behave if there is no sovereign authority regulating our actions?
- The first thing that came to my mind when I read this was, "Survival of the fittest." Hobbes' belief of "competition, defiance, and glory" seem to fit the bill. We are a self interested being, and we will do whatever is necessary to appease our desires. It would be one big "war."
63. For Hobbes, what is the fundamental justification for the founding of a commonwealth? What would people give up, and what would they gain in the founding of the commonwealth? What overriding reason would human beings have to hand over absolute power to a sovereign authority?
- Hobbes believes that people are unable to rely independently to secure "livelihood and contentment." Therefore, human beings form commonwealths. This enables them to better rely on each other using social contracts and etc. They would have to give up the idea of living in the state nature and govern over themselves freely. They would gain peace of mind. An overriding authority would be elected in order to maintain control and make sure social contracts were honored and not ignored. One problem with "absolute power" is that it absolutely corrupts, this elected official would succumb to the same pressures that any other human would fall to.
64. In Hobbes's model, who are the contracting parties in the social contract? Is the sovereign involved in the contract? Why or why not?
- The contracting parties in the social contract would be those individuals that want order. the sovereign is not involved in this contract. I think that one is elected just to be elected and they do not have absolute power.
65. Explain Hobbes's model of political legitimacy. For Hobbes, under what circumstances is a political authority legitimate? Under what circumstances is it not legitimate? Explain your views on Hobbes's reasoning in your answer.
- Hobbes believes that "political obligation ends when protection ceases. Also, Legitimacy doesn't depend on how a
a sovereign came to power, but rather on how well it can effectively protect those who obey it. I tend to agree with this answer because, what good is a government that cant protect its constituents. I think that the safety and protection of its constituents should be the main priority.
66. For Hobbes, should power be divided in a commonwealth? What does Hobbes think would happen if power was divided? Does Hobbes think this would be a good or a bad thing? Explain your answer.
- Hobbes view is that there should only be one ruler in the commonwealth. If power was divided, he thinks that the government would be rendered powerless if one branch of government contradicted the other. Therefore, it would be most efficient if there was one ruler. I dont think that this is a good idea because earlier, when we talked about only one person having power, it would maybe bring about corruption, its weird how he seems to ignore that with his reasoning for having one powerful leader.
67. For Hobbes, should power be limited in a commonwealth? What does Hobbes think would happen if the power of the sovereign was limited? Does Hobbes think this would be a good or a bad thing? Explain your answer.
- Hobbes believes that if power were limited it compromises the idea of a commonwealth. I guess the patriot act would fall under this question. We want our government to protect us from the dangers of the world. The government thinks that buy using the patriot act it can protect us more thoroughly, we believe the patriot act to be an invasion of privacy. In this way, Hobbes believes, that it just makes the job of the commonwealth much more difficult if power were limited.
- Hobbes believed that human nature was based upon our needs, if we were cold, our reaction would be to warm ourselves up.. if we were hungry, our action would be to eat. Our entire nature is based up on pleasure and pain, we do things mainly to get rid of a physical discomfort we may have. Its almost as if we are motivated by our next meal or motivated to satisfy our next need. We are built that way. Our actions are almost "mechanical" in the way we go about things, so very predictable.
62. For Hobbes, how is human nature related to human behavior in the state of nature? Given his model of human nature and motivation, how would we expect human beings to behave if there is no sovereign authority regulating our actions?
- The first thing that came to my mind when I read this was, "Survival of the fittest." Hobbes' belief of "competition, defiance, and glory" seem to fit the bill. We are a self interested being, and we will do whatever is necessary to appease our desires. It would be one big "war."
63. For Hobbes, what is the fundamental justification for the founding of a commonwealth? What would people give up, and what would they gain in the founding of the commonwealth? What overriding reason would human beings have to hand over absolute power to a sovereign authority?
- Hobbes believes that people are unable to rely independently to secure "livelihood and contentment." Therefore, human beings form commonwealths. This enables them to better rely on each other using social contracts and etc. They would have to give up the idea of living in the state nature and govern over themselves freely. They would gain peace of mind. An overriding authority would be elected in order to maintain control and make sure social contracts were honored and not ignored. One problem with "absolute power" is that it absolutely corrupts, this elected official would succumb to the same pressures that any other human would fall to.
64. In Hobbes's model, who are the contracting parties in the social contract? Is the sovereign involved in the contract? Why or why not?
- The contracting parties in the social contract would be those individuals that want order. the sovereign is not involved in this contract. I think that one is elected just to be elected and they do not have absolute power.
65. Explain Hobbes's model of political legitimacy. For Hobbes, under what circumstances is a political authority legitimate? Under what circumstances is it not legitimate? Explain your views on Hobbes's reasoning in your answer.
- Hobbes believes that "political obligation ends when protection ceases. Also, Legitimacy doesn't depend on how a
a sovereign came to power, but rather on how well it can effectively protect those who obey it. I tend to agree with this answer because, what good is a government that cant protect its constituents. I think that the safety and protection of its constituents should be the main priority.
66. For Hobbes, should power be divided in a commonwealth? What does Hobbes think would happen if power was divided? Does Hobbes think this would be a good or a bad thing? Explain your answer.
- Hobbes view is that there should only be one ruler in the commonwealth. If power was divided, he thinks that the government would be rendered powerless if one branch of government contradicted the other. Therefore, it would be most efficient if there was one ruler. I dont think that this is a good idea because earlier, when we talked about only one person having power, it would maybe bring about corruption, its weird how he seems to ignore that with his reasoning for having one powerful leader.
67. For Hobbes, should power be limited in a commonwealth? What does Hobbes think would happen if the power of the sovereign was limited? Does Hobbes think this would be a good or a bad thing? Explain your answer.
- Hobbes believes that if power were limited it compromises the idea of a commonwealth. I guess the patriot act would fall under this question. We want our government to protect us from the dangers of the world. The government thinks that buy using the patriot act it can protect us more thoroughly, we believe the patriot act to be an invasion of privacy. In this way, Hobbes believes, that it just makes the job of the commonwealth much more difficult if power were limited.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Mmm.. Bacon
1. What does Bacon mean by "natures?"
- I think that Bacon basically is talking about everything natural.
2. What does Bacon mean by "forms?:
- I may be way off base on this but i believe that by forms he means: heat, light, sound, etc.. forms of nature..
3. Explain Bacon's Idols of the Tribe:
- Idols of the Tribe are the various aspects of human nature: race, maybe personality, morality, ethical code, etc..
4. Explain Bacon's Idols of the Cave:
- Idols of the Cave are basically idols of the individual man. By that I think he means that their needs of shelter, food, education, etc..
5. Explain Bacon's Idols of the Marketplace:
- Idols of the Marketplace are formed by interaction between an individual and their surroundings, neighbors, and society in general..
6. Explain Bacon's Idols of the Theatre:
- Idols of the Theatre are ideas that are instilled in an individual by various philosophies and from protests etc. (Maybe today commercials would fall under this category?)
7. Explain Bacon's table of presence
- Bacon's table of presence lists all the cases wherein the phenomenon exists whose formal cause is sought: for instance, heat, which appears to be present in fire, in the sun, etc. I guess things like gravity might fall under this, i am not entirely sure how to explain this...
8. Explain Bacon's table of absence
- Bacon's table of absence lists all the cases in which the phenomenon under analysis does not appear to be present: there is no heat in the light of the stars, of the moon, etc. Aite, so the sun produces light which produces heat. Right? Wrong, if this was true then why doesn't the moon produce heat. Seems quite logical to me : )
9. Explain Bacon's table of degrees
- Bacon's Table of degrees lists the increase and decrease of the given phenomenon in one object or in different objects. This third table, by leading to knowledge of the law of movement of the phenomenon, should bring us to know the formal cause (law) of the phenomenon itself. It is not always easy to arrive at a formulation of the law of the form of movement. In such a case we must be content with a temporary or working hypothesis, and await new instances, new experiments. I think this is pretty self explanatory.
10. Explain the Baconian Method as completely as you can.
- Wow. The Baconian Method is basically a way of finding similarities between two phenomenons then being able to deduce what factors match the occurrence and ones that dont. Also, you would be able to map out the change. Using all of these things you would be able to "deduce by elimination and inductive reasoning" the cause of said phenomenon.
11. What did Bacon find lacking in Aristotle?
- Bacon found that Aristotle was lacking the general theory of science, which he believed could be applied to all aspects of philosophy. Bacon's method was probably much more contemporary and sophisticated.
12. In your best judgement, how is Bacon's method related to the modern scientific method?
- I guess it could be almost like an experiment. Its a process, just as someone forms a hypothesis and continues; Bacon's method someone would choose a phenomenon to examine and go through a step by step analysis of it. I guess it kind of relates to it.
- I think that Bacon basically is talking about everything natural.
2. What does Bacon mean by "forms?:
- I may be way off base on this but i believe that by forms he means: heat, light, sound, etc.. forms of nature..
3. Explain Bacon's Idols of the Tribe:
- Idols of the Tribe are the various aspects of human nature: race, maybe personality, morality, ethical code, etc..
4. Explain Bacon's Idols of the Cave:
- Idols of the Cave are basically idols of the individual man. By that I think he means that their needs of shelter, food, education, etc..
5. Explain Bacon's Idols of the Marketplace:
- Idols of the Marketplace are formed by interaction between an individual and their surroundings, neighbors, and society in general..
6. Explain Bacon's Idols of the Theatre:
- Idols of the Theatre are ideas that are instilled in an individual by various philosophies and from protests etc. (Maybe today commercials would fall under this category?)
7. Explain Bacon's table of presence
- Bacon's table of presence lists all the cases wherein the phenomenon exists whose formal cause is sought: for instance, heat, which appears to be present in fire, in the sun, etc. I guess things like gravity might fall under this, i am not entirely sure how to explain this...
8. Explain Bacon's table of absence
- Bacon's table of absence lists all the cases in which the phenomenon under analysis does not appear to be present: there is no heat in the light of the stars, of the moon, etc. Aite, so the sun produces light which produces heat. Right? Wrong, if this was true then why doesn't the moon produce heat. Seems quite logical to me : )
9. Explain Bacon's table of degrees
- Bacon's Table of degrees lists the increase and decrease of the given phenomenon in one object or in different objects. This third table, by leading to knowledge of the law of movement of the phenomenon, should bring us to know the formal cause (law) of the phenomenon itself. It is not always easy to arrive at a formulation of the law of the form of movement. In such a case we must be content with a temporary or working hypothesis, and await new instances, new experiments. I think this is pretty self explanatory.
10. Explain the Baconian Method as completely as you can.
- Wow. The Baconian Method is basically a way of finding similarities between two phenomenons then being able to deduce what factors match the occurrence and ones that dont. Also, you would be able to map out the change. Using all of these things you would be able to "deduce by elimination and inductive reasoning" the cause of said phenomenon.
11. What did Bacon find lacking in Aristotle?
- Bacon found that Aristotle was lacking the general theory of science, which he believed could be applied to all aspects of philosophy. Bacon's method was probably much more contemporary and sophisticated.
12. In your best judgement, how is Bacon's method related to the modern scientific method?
- I guess it could be almost like an experiment. Its a process, just as someone forms a hypothesis and continues; Bacon's method someone would choose a phenomenon to examine and go through a step by step analysis of it. I guess it kind of relates to it.
Friday, February 6, 2009
Father of Modern Science.
1. Ockham is described as a “nominalist.” Explain what “nominalism” means in this context.
- I think the easiest way to describe a nominalist or nominalism is basically that only individuals exist. "And that universals are the products of abstraction from individuals by the human mind and have no extra-mental existence."
2. Explain “Ockham’s Razor” in your own words.
- This seemed fairly straight-forward: If a person is trying to explain a phenomenon, that person should make as few assumptions as possible about the occurance, and using the process of elimination to come to an acceptable theory or hypothesis.
3. Apply Ockham’s razor to the problem of universals. Which answer to the problem would be cut away? Which answer would remain?
- I am probably going to be way off on this but I think it basically means that universals do not exist because they arent observable, he cant see them, touch them, taste them, smell them. How would he make assumptions about something that he cannot experience first hand.
4. What did Ockham believe about “mere belief?”
- He believed that it meant exactly that. Mere Belief. He put little stock in it because it was susseptible to error; however, he thought it was suitable for our needs.
5. Which of Ockham’s ideas was important to British philosophy for years to come?
- I am guessing his theory of Occam's Razor was probably the most important of his many contributions.
6. What did Nicholas of Autrecourt say? Why was this important for the transition from scholasticism to modernism?
- Nicholas of Autrecourt believed that the efforts of applying philosphical reasoning to Christian doctrine had failed and therefore should be abandoned. I think this was important because it was one of steps that led to the demise of scholasticism.
7. How did Hasdai Crescas among the Jews and Meister Eckhart apply rational methods? Why was this important for the transition from scholasticism to modernism?
- Hasdai Crescas applied rational methods "only in order to generate paradoxical results that would demonstrate the need ro rely upon mystical union with god as the foundation for genuine human knowledge." This was important because he generated paradoxical results that enabled people to think outside the realm of god.
8. How did Nicolas of Cusa try to save scholasticism? Why do you think it didn’t work?
- Nicolas of Cusa tried to save scholasticism by deliberately embracing contradiction. I think it didnt work because his claim was so ambiguous, and there was no way to prove it.
9. What method of inquiry did Galileo reject?
- I am not sure but it seems like he rejected blind allegiance to authority, both philosophical and religious, in matters of science.
10. What was Galileo’s own preferred method of inquiry?
- I think it would probably be observation and logic.
11. Why did Galileo have so many enemies?
- I think that he had alot of enemies because he went against the grain on alot of his observations. He not only made alot of enemies, they were very powerful ones! haha the worst kind to have.
12. What is Galileo mainly remembered for?
- Probably the telescope! Well beyond its time.
- Albert Einstein called him the father of Modern science, which is reallly high praise. There were probably numerous contributions that were important to science. He was the first to clearly state the laws of nature are mathematical. Just one of many..
14. How did Galileo pi… infuriate the Aristotleans?
- He infuiated the Aristotleans because he was being rational and explaining his views. They didnt agree with his line of thinking, so they threw him in to prison. (Whack if you ask me)
15. How does the Aristotlean reaction illustrate the difference between premodern and modern thinking?
- Premodern thinking was stubborn and rigid, not really open to new ideas or different perspectives on a subject. Whereas, modern thinking accepted all views so long as they were backed up with a rational explaination.
16. How was Galileo wrong about comets?
- Galileo believed that comets were an atmospheric phenomenon as opposed to outter space objects.
17. What did Galileo clearly say about the laws of nature?
- Galileo explained that the laws of nature were mathematical and everything was geometric.
18. What was Galileo’s theory of tides?
- Galileo hypothesized that tides were caused by the rotation of the Earth on it's axis which caused the oceans to sway back and forth.
19. What was wrong with Galileo’s theory of tides?
- Galileo's theory was wrong because there are more tides in a day then the earth can rotate on its axis. We would have to be spinning super fast for his theory to be possible.
20. How is Galileo’s theory of tides a radical departure from scholastic thinking?
- I am not really sure, but I guess it could be a radical departure from scholastic thinking because he is assuming to much, rather than assessing and eliminating his assumptions based on fact rather than what he thought was right.
- I think the easiest way to describe a nominalist or nominalism is basically that only individuals exist. "And that universals are the products of abstraction from individuals by the human mind and have no extra-mental existence."
2. Explain “Ockham’s Razor” in your own words.
- This seemed fairly straight-forward: If a person is trying to explain a phenomenon, that person should make as few assumptions as possible about the occurance, and using the process of elimination to come to an acceptable theory or hypothesis.
3. Apply Ockham’s razor to the problem of universals. Which answer to the problem would be cut away? Which answer would remain?
- I am probably going to be way off on this but I think it basically means that universals do not exist because they arent observable, he cant see them, touch them, taste them, smell them. How would he make assumptions about something that he cannot experience first hand.
4. What did Ockham believe about “mere belief?”
- He believed that it meant exactly that. Mere Belief. He put little stock in it because it was susseptible to error; however, he thought it was suitable for our needs.
5. Which of Ockham’s ideas was important to British philosophy for years to come?
- I am guessing his theory of Occam's Razor was probably the most important of his many contributions.
6. What did Nicholas of Autrecourt say? Why was this important for the transition from scholasticism to modernism?
- Nicholas of Autrecourt believed that the efforts of applying philosphical reasoning to Christian doctrine had failed and therefore should be abandoned. I think this was important because it was one of steps that led to the demise of scholasticism.
7. How did Hasdai Crescas among the Jews and Meister Eckhart apply rational methods? Why was this important for the transition from scholasticism to modernism?
- Hasdai Crescas applied rational methods "only in order to generate paradoxical results that would demonstrate the need ro rely upon mystical union with god as the foundation for genuine human knowledge." This was important because he generated paradoxical results that enabled people to think outside the realm of god.
8. How did Nicolas of Cusa try to save scholasticism? Why do you think it didn’t work?
- Nicolas of Cusa tried to save scholasticism by deliberately embracing contradiction. I think it didnt work because his claim was so ambiguous, and there was no way to prove it.
9. What method of inquiry did Galileo reject?
- I am not sure but it seems like he rejected blind allegiance to authority, both philosophical and religious, in matters of science.
10. What was Galileo’s own preferred method of inquiry?
- I think it would probably be observation and logic.
11. Why did Galileo have so many enemies?
- I think that he had alot of enemies because he went against the grain on alot of his observations. He not only made alot of enemies, they were very powerful ones! haha the worst kind to have.
12. What is Galileo mainly remembered for?
- Probably the telescope! Well beyond its time.
13. Which of Galileo’s contributions was actually most important to science?
- Albert Einstein called him the father of Modern science, which is reallly high praise. There were probably numerous contributions that were important to science. He was the first to clearly state the laws of nature are mathematical. Just one of many..
14. How did Galileo pi… infuriate the Aristotleans?
- He infuiated the Aristotleans because he was being rational and explaining his views. They didnt agree with his line of thinking, so they threw him in to prison. (Whack if you ask me)
15. How does the Aristotlean reaction illustrate the difference between premodern and modern thinking?
- Premodern thinking was stubborn and rigid, not really open to new ideas or different perspectives on a subject. Whereas, modern thinking accepted all views so long as they were backed up with a rational explaination.
16. How was Galileo wrong about comets?
- Galileo believed that comets were an atmospheric phenomenon as opposed to outter space objects.
17. What did Galileo clearly say about the laws of nature?
- Galileo explained that the laws of nature were mathematical and everything was geometric.
18. What was Galileo’s theory of tides?
- Galileo hypothesized that tides were caused by the rotation of the Earth on it's axis which caused the oceans to sway back and forth.
19. What was wrong with Galileo’s theory of tides?
- Galileo's theory was wrong because there are more tides in a day then the earth can rotate on its axis. We would have to be spinning super fast for his theory to be possible.
20. How is Galileo’s theory of tides a radical departure from scholastic thinking?
- I am not really sure, but I guess it could be a radical departure from scholastic thinking because he is assuming to much, rather than assessing and eliminating his assumptions based on fact rather than what he thought was right.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Scholasticism. Aquinas. And More.
1. What is the scholastic method?
- The scholastic method is basically choosing a book by a well known author/scholar and going through it with a fine tooth comb. The theories and statements made by the author would then be discussed and debated logically.
2. What are “sententiae” and how did they figure in the scholastic
method?
-Sententiae are basically adages from ancient sources that are "quoted without context." I am guessing this means that they are old sayings that are quoted without naming their sources.. I am not entirely sure though. They were written down as points split into agreements and disagreements..
3. What was the aim of the scholastic method? What were they trying to
do?
- I suppose the scholastic method aimed to break down an authors work in order to look at all the points easier to break down rather than to go at the whole thing.. A divide and conquer type of mentality. Basically just simplified looking at the arguments.
4. What was “philology” and how did the scholastics use it?
- Philology is a combination of literary studies and linguistics. Scholastics used it to basically argue what the words said, what they intended to say, and even what it was inferring.
5. For the scholastics, what was the purpose of logical analysis?
- Logical analysis basically pointed out contradictions that weren't necessarily there but may have been noticed by the reader.
6. Why did Bonaventure think that reason supported the doctrine of
creation?
- St. Bonaventure probably supported the doctrine of creation because he accepted the Platonic doctrine that ideas do not exist but rather they are exemplified by the "divine being." I am guessing that by the divine being they are referring to the gods. And basically everything was made in their image.
7. What did Bonaventure think was our relationship to God?
- I am not entirely sure..
8. What did Aquinas think is the right relationship between faith and
reason?
- Aquinas believed that a person could always accept the religious norm by faith; however, he believed it was better if they established the most fundamental of the religious principles using reason.
9. How would Aquinas respond to a situation in which reason
contradicted faith?
- I think that Aquinas would take reason over faith because he believed that rational and logical thinking is the best way to think.. (pure guesswork)
10. State the problem of universals in your own words.
- ?!
11. Describe “realism” in your own words.
- Basically there are two forms of realism: Platonic and Aristotelian. I wont try and explain them because I am probably not qualified. Here's some Yogonic Realism: Basically things that we KNOW for sure. Things that we can see as they are: not how they will be or how they will end up.
12. Describe “nominalism” in your own words.
- Nominalism I think is kind of like physical reality as plato explains in the Republic, That whole example with the cave and what not. Its a bit much to explain especially when I dont realllly know how to explain it. Its called the Allegory of the cave. Look it up : )
- The scholastic method is basically choosing a book by a well known author/scholar and going through it with a fine tooth comb. The theories and statements made by the author would then be discussed and debated logically.
2. What are “sententiae” and how did they figure in the scholastic
method?
-Sententiae are basically adages from ancient sources that are "quoted without context." I am guessing this means that they are old sayings that are quoted without naming their sources.. I am not entirely sure though. They were written down as points split into agreements and disagreements..
3. What was the aim of the scholastic method? What were they trying to
do?
- I suppose the scholastic method aimed to break down an authors work in order to look at all the points easier to break down rather than to go at the whole thing.. A divide and conquer type of mentality. Basically just simplified looking at the arguments.
4. What was “philology” and how did the scholastics use it?
- Philology is a combination of literary studies and linguistics. Scholastics used it to basically argue what the words said, what they intended to say, and even what it was inferring.
5. For the scholastics, what was the purpose of logical analysis?
- Logical analysis basically pointed out contradictions that weren't necessarily there but may have been noticed by the reader.
6. Why did Bonaventure think that reason supported the doctrine of
creation?
- St. Bonaventure probably supported the doctrine of creation because he accepted the Platonic doctrine that ideas do not exist but rather they are exemplified by the "divine being." I am guessing that by the divine being they are referring to the gods. And basically everything was made in their image.
7. What did Bonaventure think was our relationship to God?
- I am not entirely sure..
8. What did Aquinas think is the right relationship between faith and
reason?
- Aquinas believed that a person could always accept the religious norm by faith; however, he believed it was better if they established the most fundamental of the religious principles using reason.
9. How would Aquinas respond to a situation in which reason
contradicted faith?
- I think that Aquinas would take reason over faith because he believed that rational and logical thinking is the best way to think.. (pure guesswork)
10. State the problem of universals in your own words.
- ?!
11. Describe “realism” in your own words.
- Basically there are two forms of realism: Platonic and Aristotelian. I wont try and explain them because I am probably not qualified. Here's some Yogonic Realism: Basically things that we KNOW for sure. Things that we can see as they are: not how they will be or how they will end up.
12. Describe “nominalism” in your own words.
- Nominalism I think is kind of like physical reality as plato explains in the Republic, That whole example with the cave and what not. Its a bit much to explain especially when I dont realllly know how to explain it. Its called the Allegory of the cave. Look it up : )
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)