PHILO 1

EPISTEMOLOGY

- Nature and scope of man’s capacity to know

- Episteme : knowledge
- Logos : study of

KNOWING

- Acquaintance (familiarity)
- Ability (dancing, singing)
- Propositional (I know that…)

PROPOSITION

- Has truth value

- Declarative
- Can be 2 or more sentences
- Non-material
- Concepts

THREE LOGICAL PRINCIPLES

1. PRINCIPLE OF IDENTITY
o If statement is true, then it is true
o If false, then false
2. PRINCIPLE OF NON-CONTRADICTION
o A statement cannot both be true and not true at the same time and in the same respect
3. PRINCIPLE OF EXCLUDED-MIDDLE
o A statement can only have 2 truth values
o True or false only (nothing else)
KNOWLEDGE

- Justified true belief

OBJECTIONS ON KNOWLEDGE

1. Belief is an absence of knowledge

o Answer: Pistis (faith) X vs Doxa (Opinion)
o Doxa also has knowledge
2. Justified belief is enough
o Justification + truth = redundant
o Answer: Justification – subject ; Truth – Proposition
o There is possible justified false belief
3. True belief is enough
o Answer: It could be chance or luck that something happened
4. Is Justified True Belief knowledge?

CENTRAL ISSUES

1. What is the source of knowledge?

2. Given the source, what can be known?
3. How do we validate our claims?

1. Rational (reason)
o Empiricism (senses)
o There is nothing in the mind that doesn’t pass through the senses
2. Matters of fact (a posteriori)
o Empirical (can be sensed)
o Ex: The cat is on the mat
3. Relations of ideas (a priori)
o Analytic
o Ex: A bachelor is an unmarried man
TYPES OF KNOWLEDGE CLAIMS

1. Analytic
2. Empirical
3. Evaluative (value of ethics and aesthetics)
4. Existential

THEORIES OF TRUTH

1. Coherence
o Statement --> System
2. Correspondence
a. Statement --> Reality
3. Intersubjective
o Statement --> Consensus
4. Existential
o Statement --> Subject

KNOWING THE OTHER

1. Smile
2. Sympathy
3. Love
LOGIC

- Study of methods and principles

- Distinguish correct from incorrect
- Measures validity

SYLLOGISM

- Categorical propositional
o All men are mortal
o Socrates is a man
o Therefore, Socrates is a mortal

*Inference: process of making logical conclusion

NECESSITY (DEDUCTION)

- Not a matter of degree

- Not dependent on whatever else may be the case
- Bigger to smaller

PROBABILITY (INDUCTION)

- Vice versa
- Smaller to bigger

FALLACIES

- Actual arguments
- Wrong at closer inspection
FALLACIES OF RELEVANCE

1. Ad Ignorantiam (Ignorance)
o True if not yet proven false
o False if not yet proven true
2. Ad Verecundiam
o Appeal to inappropriate authority
3. Ad Hominem
o Against the person
4. Ad Populum
o Appeal to people/emotion
o Bandwagon argument
5. Ad Misericordiam
o Appeal to pity
6. Ad Baculum
o Appeal to force
7. Ignorano Elenchi
o Irrelevant conclusion

FALLACIES OF PRESUMPTION

1. Complex question
o Immediately assumes that something is true
2. False Cause
o Assuming something because of successive events
3. Begging the Question
4. Accident
o Conclusion from generalization
o Stereotyping
5. Converse Accident
o Move to generalization
FALLACIES OF AMBIGUITY

1. Equivocation
o Homonyms, double meanings
2. Amphiboly
o Many interpretations
3. Accent
o Homonyms, double meanings
4. Division
o Whole to parts
5. Composition
o Parts to whole

CATEGORICAL PREPOSITIONS

STANDARD FORM

- Quantifier – ST – Verb – PT

A: Universal Affirmative (All S is P)

E: Universal Negative (No S is P)

I: Particular Affirmative (Some S are P)

O: Particular Negative (Some S are not P)

TRADITIONAL SQUARE OF OPPOSITION

CONTRADICTORIES: T  F ; F  T
CONTRARIES: T  F ; F  ? ; both may be F

SUBCONTRARIES:

- UNIV T  PART T
- UNIV F  PART ?
- PART F  UNIV F
- PART T  UNIV ?