Notes For Midterm Coverage (PDF)

NOTRE DAME OF DADIANGAS UNIVERSITY Integrated Basic Education Department Senior High School General Santos City NOTES FOR MIDTERM COVERAGE ❖ What is Philosophy? ▪ The word "philosophy" com...

NOTRE DAME OF DADIANGAS UNIVERSITY Integrated Basic Education Department Senior High School General Santos City NOTES FOR MIDTERM COVERAGE ❖ What is Philosophy? ▪ The word "philosophy" comes from the ancient Greek words φίλος (philos: "love") and σοφία (sophia: "wisdom"). ▪ Pythagoras was the first philosopher to talk about philosophia (φιλοσοφία) or 'the love of wisdom. 'The idea of loving wisdom puts a distance between ourselves and wisdom: if we love wisdom, it is precisely because we are not wise. Main Branches of Philosophy ▪ Metaphysics - a branch of philosophy that is concerned with the essential property of nature of things, whether physical or nonphysical, material or spiritual. What is the origin of the Universe? What is its first cause? ▪ Epistemology - is a branch of philosophy that is concerned with nature, origin and limits of knowledge. What is knowledge? How is knowledge acquired? What do people know? ▪ Logic - is a branch of philosophy that studies valid rules of inference and reasoning. What is truth? ▪ Ethics - is a branch of philosophy that studies the moral values and principles. What is good? What I ought to do? ❖ Doing Philosophy Involves the act of asking questions, contemplating about the mystery of life, constructing arguments and be able to rationally evaluate them in the end. ▪ Anybody can do philosophy as long as he raises valid or intelligent question reflects meditatively and argues in a logical manner. ▪ Philosophy begins in wonder- Aristotle Philosophical Reflection ▪ According to Gabriel Marcel philosophical reflection is deeply personal and anchored to day to day existence. ▪ Philosophical reflection is the act of giving time to think about the meaning and purpose of life. ▪ 2 types of Philosophical reflection Primary Reflection – is a kind of thinking that calculates, analyzes or recounts past events. In this way it is fragmented and compartmentalized; it is a selfish thinking since it is an instrumental thinking or a “means-end” kind of thinking.   Ability to think logically Secondary Reflection – characterized by recapturing the unity of the original experience by gathering back together by what was separated by the primary reflection; it allows us to think holistically; integrates the fragmented and compartmentalized experience into a coherent whole; a genuine or unselfish thinking; provides a holistic picture of reality; philosophical reflection=secondary reflection. ▪ Philosophical reflection as a tool in doing philosophy enables us to see the interconnectedness and interdependence of people, actions and events as well as our direct relation to them; allows us to deepen our understanding of ourselves as well as our role in the place of the world. ▪ Necessary skills needed in doing philosophy Philosophical reflection – enables us to look deeper into our experiences and see the bigger picture of reality Construction and evaluation of argument – allows us to express our ideas in a systematic and logical way; allows us to examine the ideas of other people. Three Kinds of Question ▪ Empirical Questions - questions that can be answered empirically or requires empirical information; can be answered by giving facts or information. Ex. How deep is the river? ▪ Logico-Mathematical Questions - questions requires logico-mathematical information. Ex. How many sides does a triangle have? Empirical and logico-mathematical questions are such that once we have the necessary and sufficient resources to formulate a correct answer, any further disagreement on that formulated answer may speak volumes about the parties involved but says nothing about the answer itself. ▪ Philosophical questions - are in principle open, ultimate but not absolute questions, closed under further questioning, possibly constrained by empirical and logico-mathematical resources, which require noetic resources to be answered. ❖ Historical Survey of Western Philosophy Major Periods in Philosopy ▪ Ancient Period Pre-Socratics - Focuses on natural phenomena and thought that humans are created from just a single substance.  Key figures: Thales, Pythagoras, Parmenides Socratic Period - A particular era where the inquiry on philosophy expanded on ethics, politics and epistemology.  Key Figures: Socrates, Plato, Aristotle  Medieval Period - Medieval philosophy emerged during the Middle Ages, characterized by theological issues, God's existence, knowledge problems, and individuation.  Key Figures: St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Augustine of Hippo, Boethius Modern Period - Modern philosophy is a period in the history of philosophy that occurs between the 17th and 19th centuries and emphasized the foundational role of reason in making logical inferences in forming beliefs and judgments for all branches of philosophical inquiry.  Key Figures: Rene Descartes, Immanuel Kant, David Hume Contemporary Period - Contemporary philosophy is the present period in the history of Western philosophy beginning at the early 20th century with the increasing professionalization of the discipline and the rise of analytic and continental philosophy.  Key Figures: Hegel, Soren Kierkegaard, Michel Focault ❖ Methods of Philosophizing Opinion ▪ Opinion is a personal belief or point of view that represents an outlook of an individual, which may or may not based on facts. Opinions can be subjective and vary from person to person. Truth ▪ Truth is a fact or belief that is accepted as true based on evidence and facts. ▪ Aristotle on Truth “To say of what is that it is not, or of what is not that it is, is false, while to say of what is that it is, and of what is not that it is not, is true” (Aristotle, 1011b25). ▪ truth, in metaphysics and the philosophy of language, the property of sentences, assertions, beliefs, thoughts, or propositions that are said, in ordinary discourse, to agree with the facts or to state what is the case. ▪ Kant on Truth “truth... is the agreement of cognition with its object” ▪ Aquinas on Truth The truth of our intellect is according to its conformity with its principle, that is to say, to the things from which it receives knowledge. (Summa Theologica Pars. Q. 16) ▪ Importance of Truth Opinions are personal beliefs that may not be based on facts or evidence, whereas truth is objective and based on facts and evidence. Knowing the difference is crucial for making informed decisions and avoiding misinformation. Goal of Philosophy: Truth ▪ Logical Fallacies  are common errors in reasoning that will undermine the logic of your argument; an argument may sound convincing or true but is actually flawed. Argumentum Ad hominem  Attacking the Person  this fallacy occurs when, instead of addressing someone's argument or position, you irrelevantly attack the person or some aspect of the person who is making the argument. Argumentum Ad Baculum  Appeal to Force  this fallacy occurs when, instead of addressing someone's argument or position, the person tells the hearer that something bad will happen to him/her if he/she does not accept the argument. Argumentum Ad misericordiam  Appeal to pity  this fallacy occurs when, instead of addressing someone's argument or position, the person urges the hearer to accept the argument based upon appeal to emotions, sympathy etc. Argumentum Ad populum  Appeal to popularity or popular opinion  this fallacy occurs when, instead of addressing someone's argument or position, the person urges the hearer to accept the argument because the majority of the people hold to it. Petitio Principii  Begging the question  this fallacy occurs when, there is an assumption that the thing you are trying to prove is true. Square of Oppositions ▪ Opposition is a concept in traditional logic that visually represents the relationships between different types of categorical propositions. It was originally developed by Aristotle and has been a fundamental tool in the study of classical logic. The square consists of four types of categorical propositions, which are statements about the relationships between classes or categories. A propositions (Universal Affirmative): These are statements that affirm something about an entire class. They have the form "All S is P," where S represents the subject class and P represents the predicate class. For example, "All humans are mortal." E propositions (Universal Negative): These are statements that deny something about an entire class. They have the form "No S is P," where S represents the subject class and P represents the predicate class. For example, "No mammals are cold-blooded.” I propositions (Particular Affirmative): These are statements that affirm something about a part of a class. They have the form "Some S is P," where  S represents the subject class and P represents the predicate class. For example, "Some birds can fly." O propositions (Particular Negative): These are statements that deny something about a part of a class. They have the form "Some S is not P," where S represents the subject class and P represents the predicate class. For example, "Some reptiles are not venomous."  A and E propositions are contraries: They cannot both be true at the same time. If an A proposition is true (e.g., "All S is P"), the corresponding E proposition (e.g., "No S is P") must be false, and vice versa.  I and O propositions are subcontraries: They cannot both be false at the same time. If an I proposition is true (e.g., "Some S is P"), the corresponding O proposition (e.g., "Some S is not P") must be true, and vice versa.  A and I propositions are subalterns: If an A proposition is true, the corresponding I proposition must also be true, but not necessarily vice versa. In other words, the truth of "All S is P" implies the truth of "Some S is P."  E and O propositions are subalterns: If an E proposition is true, the corresponding O proposition must also be true, but not necessarily vice versa. In other words, the truth of "No S is P" implies the truth of "Some S is not P." ❖ Theories of Knowledge Empiricism is a philosophical and epistemological approach that emphasizes the role of experience, observation, and sensory perception as the primary sources of knowledge. It posits that our understanding of the world is derived from sensory experiences and that knowledge is gained through direct interaction with the external world. Empiricists argue that knowledge cannot be acquired purely through reason or innate ideas but must be rooted in empirical evidence. ▪ Key principles and ideas associated with empiricism include: Tabula Rasa: Empiricists like John Locke believed in the concept of "tabula rasa," which means the mind is like a blank slate at birth. In other words, individuals are not born with innate knowledge but instead acquire it through experience. Sensory Experience: Empiricists argue that all knowledge originates from sensory experiences, such as seeing, hearing, touching, and tasting. These experiences are the foundation upon which our understanding of the world is built. Induction: Empiricists often rely on inductive reasoning, which involves drawing general conclusions or principles based on specific observations. Through repeated observations and experiences, one can form generalizations or hypotheses about the world. Scientific Method: Empiricism has played a significant role in the development of the scientific method. Science relies heavily on empirical evidence, experimentation, and observation to understand natural phenomena and develop theories. Rejecting Innate Ideas: Empiricists reject the idea of innate or a priori knowledge, which suggests that some knowledge is inherent or exists independently of experience. This stands in contrast to rationalism, another philosophical tradition that emphasizes the role of reason and innate ideas. Prominent empiricist philosophers include John Locke, George Berkeley, and David Hume. These thinkers have contributed significantly to the development of epistemology (the study of knowledge) and have influenced various fields, including philosophy, psychology, and science. It's important to note that while empiricism emphasizes the importance of sensory experience, it does not discount the role of reason and logic in processing and interpreting that experience. Empiricists generally believe that reason and evidence should work hand in hand to build a comprehensive understanding of the world. John Locke ▪ John Locke (1632-1704) was an influential English philosopher and one of the leading figures in the Enlightenment era. His epistemological ideas are presented in his work "An Essay Concerning Human Understanding," where he explores the nature of human knowledge, the origins of ideas, and the limits of human understanding.  ▪Locke is considered one of the foundational figures of empiricism, a philosophical school of thought that asserts that all knowledge is derived from sensory experience. He famously coined the phrase "tabula rasa," which means "blank slate." According to Locke, the human mind at birth is like a blank slate, devoid of innate ideas, and all knowledge is acquired through sensory perception and reflection on those perceptions. ▪ Simple and Complex Ideas: Locke distinguishes between simple and complex ideas. Simple ideas are the basic building blocks of our knowledge, and they are derived directly from sensory experience. These ideas are irreducible and include sensations such as colors, shapes, tastes, and sounds. Complex ideas, on the other hand, are formed by the mind through various operations like combining, comparing, and abstracting simple ideas. David Hume ▪ David Hume (1711-1776) was a Scottish philosopher known for his significant contributions to the field of epistemology. Hume's epistemological ideas are primarily presented in his works "A Treatise of Human Nature" and "An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding." ▪ he believed that all knowledge originates in sensory experience. He argued that our ideas and beliefs are derived from our impressions, which are the more vivid and forceful mental perceptions we receive through our senses. For Hume, the mind is essentially a "copies" that forms ideas by combining, comparing, and arranging impressions. ▪ Problem of Induction: Hume is famous for his critique of induction, which is the process of drawing general conclusions from specific observations. He argued that there is no rational justification for induction because it relies on the assumption that the future will resemble the past, and this assumption cannot be proven through reason alone. ▪ Instead, it is a habit of the mind based on past experiences. This led Hume to the conclusion that our beliefs about causality, which rely on induction, are not grounded in reason but rather in custom and habit. Rationalism is a philosophical and epistemological approach that emphasizes the role of reason, logic, and intellectual faculties as the primary sources of knowledge. It posits that certain truths and knowledge can be known independently of sensory experience or empirical evidence and that innate ideas or a priori reasoning can provide insights into the nature of reality. ▪ Key principles and ideas associated with rationalism include: Innate Ideas: Rationalists believe that some ideas or knowledge are innate, meaning they are present in the human mind from birth or are a fundamental part of human consciousness. These innate ideas serve as the foundation for understanding the world. Deductive Reasoning: Rationalists often rely on deductive reasoning, a form of logical inference that involves deriving specific conclusions from  general principles or premises. This process is often seen as a reliable way to arrive at certain knowledge. Mathematics and Geometry: Rationalists place a significant emphasis on mathematics and geometry as examples of a priori knowledge. Mathematical truths, such as the Pythagorean theorem, are thought to be discovered through pure reason and are not dependent on empirical observation. Universal and Necessary Truths: Rationalists argue that some truths are universal and necessary, applying to all rational beings and not contingent on particular experiences. These truths are often seen as foundational and unchanging. Critique of Empiricism: Rationalists often critique empiricism, the opposing philosophical tradition that emphasizes sensory experience as the primary source of knowledge. Rationalists argue that sensory experiences can be deceptive or unreliable, and that reason provides a more secure foundation for knowledge. Prominent rationalist philosophers include René Descartes, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, and Baruch Spinoza. Descartes, for example, is famous for his statement "Cogito, ergo sum" ("I think, therefore I am"), which reflects his emphasis on reason as the foundation of knowledge and his skepticism about the reliability of sensory perception. It's important to note that while rationalism and empiricism are often presented as opposing approaches to knowledge, many philosophical systems and individuals incorporate elements of both. In modern philosophy, there is often an effort to find a balance between the role of reason and empirical evidence in acquiring knowledge. Rene Descartes ▪ René Descartes (1596-1650) was a French philosopher, mathematician, and scientist who is often regarded as one of the founding figures of modern philosophy. Descartes is best known for his method of critical thinking and his dualism of mind and body. ▪ Methodical Doubt: Descartes is famous for his method of radical doubt. He sought to establish a firm foundation for knowledge by systematically doubting everything that could be doubted. He doubted the reliability of his senses, the truth of his beliefs, and even the existence of an external world. His famous statement "Cogito, ergo sum" (I think, therefore I am) emerged from this process of doubt. ▪ He concluded that while he could doubt everything, including the existence of the external world or even the existence of God, he could not doubt the existence of himself as a thinking being. Thus, he found a foundation for certain knowledge in his own existence as a thinking thing. ▪ Although Descartes subjected nearly everything to doubt, he argued that the idea of a perfect and infinite God could not be doubted. He believed that God  was the guarantor of truth and that God's existence provided a foundation for the reliability of human reason and the natural world. Baruch Spinoza ▪ Baruch Spinoza (1632-1677) was a Dutch philosopher of Portuguese-Jewish descent who is regarded as one of the most important figures in the history of Western philosophy. His work is often associated with rationalism and his metaphysical system, which is expounded in his major work, "Ethics," published posthumously. ▪ Knowledge as Intellectual Intuition: Spinoza proposed the idea of "intellectual intuition" as the highest form of knowledge. According to him, intellectual intuition is the direct and intuitive apprehension of the essential nature of things through reason. It allows individuals to grasp the underlying unity and necessity of the universe. ▪ Spinoza's epistemology is grounded in his metaphysical framework of substance monism. He believed that there is only one substance in the universe, which he called "God" or "Nature." All finite things, including individual minds and bodies, are merely modes or expressions of this one substance. Pragmatism ▪ Pragmatism is a philosophical tradition that – very broadly – understands knowing the world as inseparable from agency within it. This general idea has attracted a remarkably rich and at times contrary range of interpretations, including: that all philosophical concepts should be tested via scientific experimentation, that a claim is true if and only if it is useful (relatedly: if a philosophical theory does not contribute directly to social progress then it is not worth much), that experience consists in transacting with rather than representing nature, that articulate language rests on a deep bed of shared human practices that can never be fully ‘made explicit’. ▪ In the United States in the late 19th century, particularly via the writings of Charles Sanders Peirce, William James, and John Dewey, pragmatism emerged as a philosophical school of thought. Practical ramifications, experience, and the scientific method are prioritized by pragmatics as crucial factors for determining whether ideas, beliefs, or hypotheses are true or meaningful. It denies absolute or permanent facts and places more emphasis on the utility and efficacy of ideas and methods for accomplishing particular objectives or resolving particular issues. ▪ Instrumentalism: Pragmatists see concepts, theories, and beliefs as objects or tools that have a function. They are prized for their usefulness in directing activity and attaining objectives. ▪ Experience as the Source of Knowledge: Pragmatists place a strong emphasis on the role that actual experience plays in forming our conceptions of reality. Our interactions with the environment and the results of our decisions are how we learn.  ▪Anti-Dogmatism: Pragmatism favors adaptation and flexibility above rigid, dogmatic ideas. Beliefs have to be open to adjustment and updating in light of fresh information and experiences. Positivism ▪ Logical positivism, sometimes known as logical empiricism, was an early twentieth-century philosophical movement centered in Vienna, Austria. It intended to apply the concepts and methods of empirical science to philosophy in order to establish a more rigorous and meaningful knowledge of the universe in response to the perceived flaws of conventional philosophy. Verification Principle: Logical positivists held that meaningful statements must be verifiable either through empirical observation or logical analysis. This idea was intended to exclude metaphysical, religious, or value judgments from the realm of meaningful discourse because they couldn't be empirically or logically verified. Empiricism was heavily emphasized in logical positivism, with the belief that knowledge should be founded on empirical evidence and sensory experience. Statements that could not be logically supported were deemed worthless. Metaphysical assertions, which imply the presence of non-observable, transcendent beings or worlds, were rejected by logical positivists because they could not be experimentally validated. As a result, many classic philosophical issues and concerns were rejected. Rudolf Carnap ▪ a prominent philosopher, logician, and philosopher of science, known for his significant contributions to the fields of logic, philosophy of language, and the philosophy of science. He was one of the leading figures of the Vienna Circle, a group of philosophers and scientists in Vienna, Austria, who were central to the development of logical positivism. ▪ Logical Syntax of Language: Carnap's early work focused on the philosophy of language. He developed a framework known as the "logical syntax of language," which aimed to provide a formal, logical analysis of the structure of language. He argued that many philosophical problems were rooted in linguistic confusion and could be resolved through precise analysis of language. ▪ Carnap was a proponent of the verification principle, a central idea in logical positivism. He believed that meaningful statements were those that could be empirically verified or logically analyzed. This principle was a key component of the logical positivist project to eliminate metaphysical and nonsensical statements from philosophical discourse. ▪ Like other logical positivists, Carnap rejected metaphysical claims as meaningless due to their lack of empirical or logical grounding. He sought to replace metaphysical questions with scientifically verifiable questions and statements.  Relativism ▪ Relativism is an approach to philosophy that holds that the reality or validity of views, values, and knowledge is relative to the environment, culture, or individual perspective in which they are held. In other words, relativism holds that what is deemed truthful or morally correct varies depending on the situation, society, or individual. ▪ Epistemic Relativism: Epistemic relativism concerns the truth or validity of knowledge claims. It suggests that what is considered knowledge or truth can vary depending on an individual's perspective, cultural background, or historical context. This view challenges the idea of objective, universal knowledge. ▪ Ontological Relativism: This perspective posits that reality itself is relative and that there is no objective reality independent of human perception or interpretation. It challenges the notion of a fixed, objective reality. ▪ Critics of relativism argue that it can lead to moral and intellectual relativism, where all beliefs and perspectives are considered equally valid, leading to a breakdown of critical thinking and moral judgment. They contend that there must be some basis for objective truth and morality to guide human behavior and decision-making. Thomas Kuhn ▪ the American philosopher of science who is best known for his influential work on the history and philosophy of science, particularly his concept of scientific revolutions and paradigm shifts. ▪ The concept of incommensurability, suggests that paradigms are often so different from one another that they cannot be compared or evaluated using a neutral, objective standard. This idea challenges the traditional view that scientific progress is a linear, cumulative process where new theories build on and improve upon older ones. ▪ Incommensurability implies that different paradigms have their own internal standards and criteria for evaluating scientific success. ▪ Kuhn argued that scientific progress occurs through "paradigm shifts," which involve a radical reconfiguration of scientific beliefs, concepts, and practices. During these shifts, an old paradigm is replaced by a new one, and the criteria for evaluating scientific work change. ▪ This can create a situation where scientists within different paradigms are working with different worldviews and methodologies, making it challenging to compare their work objectively. ▪ Relativism and Objectivity: While Kuhn's ideas may appear relativistic in the sense that they emphasize the subjectivity and context-dependence of scientific knowledge, Kuhn himself did not advocate for a complete abandonment of objectivity. He believed that within a given paradigm, scientists can still strive for objectivity and consensus, even though their criteria for evaluating knowledge may differ from those in other paradigms. ▪  What Makes Man Truly Human ▪ Man as an Embodied Spirit The human person as an embodied spirit is a philosophical and theological perspective that emphasizes the interplay between the physical body and the spiritual aspect of human nature, drawing from various religious traditions like Christianity and Neoplatonism. ▪ Dualism The human person as an embodied spirit is often linked to dualism, suggesting a fundamental distinction between the physical and spiritual aspects of human nature, encompassing both physical and immaterial aspects. ▪ Self-Awareness and Consciousness Philosophers and scholars assert that self-awareness and consciousness are essential for human beings, distinguishing them from other animals by allowing reflection on their existence, thoughts, and experiences. ▪ Reason and Rationality Humans possess a defining characteristic of rational thought, critical thinking, problem-solving, abstract thinking, moral judgment, and pursuit of knowledge and understanding. ▪ Emotions and Empathy Emotions are a fundamental aspect of human experience, requiring the ability to express and empathize with various emotions and others. ▪ Language and Communication Language is a fundamental human trait that facilitates complex communication, idea sharing, and cultural development, showcasing the ability to convey abstract concepts and emotions. ▪ Free Will and Autonomy Free will, the independent decision-making capacity, is often linked to human nature, allowing individuals to set goals and shape their own destiny. Plato and Aristotle: Relationship of Body and Soul ▪ Plato’s Phaedo (Phaedrus) Death is the separation of the soul from the body. When it is joined to a body, “the soul is only able to view existence through the bars of prison, and not in her own nature; he is wallowing in the mire of ignorance. Plato believed the human soul is divided into three parts: the rational part, the spirited part, and the appetitive part. Each part has its own function and virtue. Soul: immutable, invisible, non-composed (simple), seeking pure thought. Body: mutable. Sensing and feeling as passions and desires are affectations of the body, can blind the soul.  Man is soul, but for the time-being he uses a body. Dualism: the two are connected but are not one. According to Plato, the realm of Forms is a non-physical realm where abstract objects exist. The human soul is eternal and pre-exists in this realm. The Tripartite Theory of the Soul ▪ Aristotle on Soul Aristotle believed in one substance, substantial form and prime matter, and viewed humans as a composition of body and soul. He used act and potency to explain the physical composition of material realities and human body and soul. Plato and Aristotle studied human personhood in relation to other creatures, viewing humans as objects in the cosmos. Aristotle believed the soul is composed of three parts: the nutritive soul, the sensitive soul, and the rational soul. The nutritive soul is responsible for growth and reproduction, the sensitive soul for perception and desire, and the rational soul for reason and intellect.  The composite substance is a natural body endowed with life, the principle of this life is 'the soul.' The unity of the human person is emphasized as the unity of soul and body as form & matter (hylemorphism) The body must be as matter to the soul, while the soul is as form to act to the body. The soul is the actuality of an organic body; the soul works through the bodily organ ▪ Faculties of Human Soul Instead of speaking of 3 parts of the soul like Plato, Aristotle used the term "faculty" or "dynameis" of the souls The lowest form of the soul is the nutritive or vegetative soul, found in all living beings. the sensitive soul, which exercises the three powers of sense-perception, local motion, and desire, found in animals. The specifically human soul is the rational soul, which unites in itself the powers of the lower souls, but possesses nous, the power of speculative thought and of practical deliberation. The goal of human existence is to perform distinctly human activities and be good as a human being, as Aristotle believes humans are distinguished from other animals by their rationality. Fulfilling these functions involves exercising rationality in rational actions, as Aristotle sees humans as animals that are distinct from other animals. Human Rationality ▪ Rationality is the ability to think logically, reason, and make sound judgments. Some Philosophers believe it's a defining feature of human cognition.  ▪Plato's Theory of Forms The realm of Forms is eternal, unchanging and perfect. Knowledge can only be found in the realm of Forms. ▪ Aristotle's Concept of the Rational Animal Aristotle believed humans are rational animals because of their capacity to reason. He argued that reason allows humans to have a moral sense and to make ethical choices. Aristotle believed that the rational aspect of human nature is what sets humans apart from other animals. ▪ Descartes' Cogito Ergo Sum The phrase "Cogito, ergo sum" means "I think, therefore I am". ▪ Criticism of Rationality Some philosophers argue that human rationality has limitations and that it cannot fully comprehend complex issues. Emotions can also affect our decisions. “The heart has its reason which reason cannot” – Blaise Pascal “What is born out of love is beyond good and evil” – Friedrich Nietzsche ▪ Immanuel Kant's Critique of Pure Reason He argued that our minds have innate structures that shape our experiences. Kant believed that knowledge comes from our senses and reasoning. According to Kant, reason is necessary for understanding the world. Human Person and the Environment ▪ We all have a role in protecting the environment. Use energy-efficient products, reduce, reuse, and recycle, and conserve water. Plant trees and reduce plastic use. ▪ Environmental Ethics branch of applied philosophy that studies the conceptual foundations of environmental values as well as more concrete issues surrounding societal attitudes, actions, and policies to protect and sustain biodiversity and ecological systems. ▪ Approaches to the Environment Anthropocentrism views humans as the center of the universe, with nature existing only to serve human needs. Biocentrism sees nature and all living organisms as equally valuable, with humans being just one part of the ecosystem. Ecocentrism emphasizes the interconnectedness of all living things and the importance of preserving the environment for future generations. Our relationship with the environment is not just about preservation, but also about being mindful of our impact for future generations to come. ▪ The Challenge to Anthropocentrism  Instrumental Value vs. Intrinsic Value  In the literature on environmental ethics the distinction between instrumental value and intrinsic value (in the sense of “non- instrumental value”) is of considerable importance. The former is the value of things as means to further some other ends, whereas the latter is the value of things as ends in themselves regardless of whether they are also useful as means to other ends. For instance, certain fruits have instrumental value for bats who feed on them, since feeding on the fruits is a means to survival for the bats. However, it is not widely agreed that fruits have value as ends in themselves. Ecofeminism  Not all feminist theorists would call that common underlying oppressive structure “androcentric” or “patriarchal”. But it is generally agreed that core features of the structure include dichotomies, hierarchical thinking, and a “logic of domination”, which are typical of, if not essential to, male-chauvinism. These patterns of thinking and conceptualizing the world, many feminist theorists argue, also nourish and sustain other forms of chauvinism including human-chauvinism (i.e., anthropocentrism), which is responsible for much human exploitation of, and destructiveness towards, nature. ▪ PETER SINGER ON ENVIRONMENT we are not separate from the environment, we are a part of it, and our actions have a profound impact on its well-being and our own survival. Key concepts in Peter Singer's environmental philosophy  According to Singer, humans have a moral obligation to protect the environment and its inhabitants, including non-human animals and future generations.  Peter Singer's utilitarian philosophy argues for ethical environmentalism that prioritizes reducing suffering, promoting biodiversity, and preserving ecosystems. ▪ The Aldo Leopold Land Ethics we must learn to live in harmony with nature and recognize our responsibility to protect and preserve the delicate balance of the natural world. The Land Ethic  Leopold argued that humans should expand their ethical concerns beyond their fellow humans to include the land, plants, animals, and ecosystems. He believed that a land ethic was necessary to address the ecological and environmental challenges facing society. ▪ Church on Environment  “When nature is viewed solely as a source of profit and gain, this has serious consequences for society”- Laudato Si Intersubjectivity Intersubjectivity, a term originally coined by the philosopher Edmund Husserl (1859–1938), is most simply stated as the interchange of thoughts and feelings, both conscious and unconscious, between two persons or “subjects,” as facilitated by empathy. Marcel on Intersubjectivity ❖ Our starting point is the “I exist” which is a unity, that is to say, is also I manifest, to myself and to others. ❖ This is due to the datum of My Body ❖ My body lies between having and being, a paradox: I have my body I am my body ❖ I have my body insofar as my body is an object, like other bodies, but my body is also me, the “I” manifested. I cannot say entirely “I have my body” like “I have my dog” because there is no separation between me and my body. ❖ I am body insofar as my body is a subject, a unique body, but I cannot be totally identified with my body. I cannot say entirely “I am my body” because I exceed the manifestations of my body. ❖ The way I exist my body is one of incarnate subjectivity, embodied subjectivity. ❖ My body is a subjectivity incarnated; thus, no separation of body and consciousness. ❖ I am a felt subjectivity, a consciousness plunged into a world but exceeds it. ❖ My body opens me up to a world. (cf. quotation from Merleau- Ponty) ❖ My body is an intermediary to the world ❖ Intermediary understood in 2 senses: familiarity distance ❖ Because of my body, I am a being-in-the-world-with-others.  ❖ My being-in-the-world-with-others is characterized by facticity- transcendence. ❖ Facticity-transcendence is a unity, the two cannot be separated. ❖ Facticity means my having a perspective, a “here” and “now,” an “already there,” a situation, a point of view. ❖ I am constantly “here” and not “there,” I am born healthy or weak, rich or poor. ❖ Nothing is offered to me except from a certain point of view, a situation, and from this perspective everything presents itself to me. ❖ It is true that I can change this perspective but I will be substituting another for this. Thus, the necessity of a perspective due to being an engaged-subjectivity. ❖ Transcendence means I can call into question, revoke, overcome, surpass my determination. ❖ The “here” and “now” of facticity points to a “there” and “not-yet”. ❖ A perspective or point of view is a direction to another perspective or point of view. ❖ At every moment I take a stand, an attitude towards my facticity, I project myself. ❖ For example, sensation is both a structure, a fact, but modified by my projects (there is more to see, hear, etc.) ❖ It is impossible to look at the sensory system as it unfolds because I am the system being unfolded. ❖ Thus, my presence to the world is twofold: static and dynamic (being- able-to be). ❖ Man is one with the world but also distant from it (able to say “no” and plan ahead). ❖ Man is a self-projecting project. Heidegger on Intersubjectivity ❖ He examined intersubjectivity in the context of Being-in-the-World. He emphasized the idea of shared cultural practices and language as the basis for our understanding of reality and the existence of others. ▪ Human existence therefore is not given once and for all-in-one instance but as ecstatic. ▪ Man is a movement which continually reaches beyond itself; man is temporal, past-present-future. ▪ Our common conception of time is a series of “nows” future: a now that has not become real yet past: a now that is gone because of the appearance of another now, the present. ▪ The image we have of time here is like the river, flowing from the waterfall (the past) towards the sea (future). ▪ But this presupposes a witness, standing on a rock and watching the river flow. ▪ Things themselves have changeless, indivisible being in them. Change presupposes a certain position which I take up and from which I see things. ▪ Time arises from my relation to things, my being-toward -the-world. ▪ From a certain perspective, the water is not moving from the past to the future but from the future sinking into the past--the future is a brooding presence moving to meet me, the landscape if I were to sit on a boat in a stream. ▪ Time is not a process I record but a dimension of my being. ▪ For Husserl, time is the protention and retention running from the central “I.” ▪ For Merleau-Ponty, time is the protention and retention running not from the central “I” but from my perceptual field. ▪ Time, is not a line but a network of intentionalities. ▪ Notes: ❖ A, A’, A” are bound together not by identifying synthesis but by transitional synthesis. ❖ A, B, C run into each other. A becomes B because A has been but an anticipation of B as present and its own lapse into the past. ❖ Present asserts the presence of the whole past and anticipates all that is to come. ▪ Time is my field of presence which I the subject disrupt to adumbrate a perspective, to introduce non-being into it, a non- being which is the past and a non-being which is the future. ▪ The past is not past, nor the future future unless there is a subject conscious and giving non-being into it. ▪ Present is not closed but opens into the past and future, implies a subject. ▪ Subjectivity is presence but an open presence. ▪ Time is subjectivity introduced into the world and implying an ekstase towards the future and towards the past. ▪ The present is privileged because being and consciousness coincide, and yet it is also vague. ▪ The present is the foundation and opening to the past and future. ▪ The ecstatic outreaching of temporality makes possible “sens” (sense, reason, direction, significance) ▪ Time also provides the matrix in which I can be mutually present to another subject. ▪ Two temporalities are not exclusive: each one arrives at self- knowledge only by projecting itself into a present where both can be joined together. ▪ This gives rise to the social world and historicity ▪ Heidegger’s notion of time is shown in his description of the structure of ▪ Dasein (There-being) as care.  ▪ Care is “having to be ahead of itself while being-already-in-the- world and being absorbed in intra-worldly beings.” ▪ Ahead of itself: existentiality: future being-already-in-the-world: facticity: past, having been being at: fallenness: making present ▪ The future is the coming towards itself of Dasein, presupposes the “having been” ▪ Having been is the past that is still there: what I have been and what I am in some way. ▪ Making present: Understanding its own being, Dasein understands the human situation as a whole and unveils intra-wordly beings. This presupposes the future (anticipation) and the past (return) ❖ Intersubjectivity: I-Thou Relationship o The I-Thou relationship is characterized by mutual recognition and respect to the other in order for us to flourish and achieve meaningful existence o mutuality, directness, presentness, intensity and ineffability. Buber described the between as a bold leap into the experience of the other while simultaneously being transparent, present and accessible. o Engaging with another being, such as another person, nature, or God, is a sacred and unique encounter characterized by mutual presence, full engagement, and a deep connection between the "I" and "Thou." o This mode of relating is open to the other's subjectivity and embraces their inherent mystery and transcendence, making the relationship an end in itself. o The I-It relationship is characterized by objectification, manipulation which leads to alienation and disconnection to the world. o The "I-It" relationship refers to individuals viewing others as objects or means to an end, often leading to detachment and manipulation, disregarding or devaluing the other's subjectivity. The Nature, Limitations and Responsibility of Freedom ▪ Freedom is the power to act, speak or think without externally imposed restraints, but it must be exercised responsibly and without infringing on the rights of others. ▪ Nature of Freedom Negative Freedom  emphasizes the absence of external constraints or interference. Negative freedom means being free from coercion, oppression, or external limitations. It's often referred to as "freedom from." Positive Freedom  Positive freedom implies having the means, capabilities, and opportunities to make meaningful choices and lead a self-determined life. It's often referred to as "freedom to." Other Types of Freedom  Political Freedom  Existential Freedom  Ethical and Moral Freedom  Cultural and Artistic Freedom ▪ Limitations of Freedom Legal Constraints  In societies, laws and regulations are enacted to preserve order, safeguard individual rights, and secure the common good. These rules can limit some activities in order to protect others. Public and Safety Concern  Individual liberties may be restricted by governments in the sake of public safety. These restrictions are intended to safeguard residents from harm, but they may cause worries about civil liberties and privacy. National Security  When governments fear that national security is jeopardized, they may restrict some liberties, such as freedom of expression or freedom of the press. In certain circumstances, censorship and monitoring techniques may be deployed, raising concerns about the balance between security and freedom. Augustine on Freedom  Free will is a gift from God because it drives us to choose the good, but there are instances that the real intention of the free will, which is to choose the good is being paralyzed. St. Augustine made an appeal to the bible to justify that evil occurs because of the misuse of free will; Adam and Eve disobeyed God, and temptation pushes them to use their free will in its opposite nature - to do evil. Augustine on Free Will  The argument of St. Augustine was: every creation is good because the creator which is God is good. But if everything was made by God  are good, where does evil come from? For St. Augustine, evil is the absence of good, thus not part of the creation of God. God created ‘everything’ good excluding evil, since evil for St. Augustine is ‘Nothing’ (Nihil in Latin). St. Thomas on Free Will  St. Thomas views free will as the "appetitive power" of reason, requiring the intellect's help to achieve its end. The intellect is the "cognitive power" of reason, enabling understanding and seizing the goodness of the known. John Locke on Freedom  Locke's liberalism posits that every individual has inherent freedom and rights, including property rights protection. The state has no authority to use someone's private property for the common good if the owner feels unharmed. Locke argued that the state's role is to safeguard the natural rights of citizens, not just other rights. Jean Paul Sartre on Freedom  Sartre believed in the inherent freedom of individuals and their responsibility for their actions and awareness. He argued that complete freedom equates to complete responsibility, even for those who choose not to be responsible. His moral theory emphasized that ethics is primarily a matter of individual conscience.  “Man is Condemned to be free” Freedom without responsibility can lead to chaos and anarchy. True freedom requires a balance of individual rights and social responsibility.