Teaching Theory of Knowledge

Introduction to Philosophy
(Emphasizing Epistemology)

CONTRIBUTORS: Joshua Hoffman, Gary Rosenkrantz.

      In this course students are introduced to philosophy through readings in classical modern philosophers. The historical material is organized around certain central problems in philosophy, especially ones in epistemology. Related issues in metaphysics are also covered. The course consists of four parts: a preliminary section in which basic concepts are introduced; a second part on Descartes and Rationalism; a third section on Berkeley's Empirical Idealism; and a final part on Russell's Scientific Realism. All readings are from original sources in inexpensive paperback editions.

      A detailed syllabus which gives the topics and associated readings for each day of the course is provided below. In addition, partial lecture notes, including representative arguments which may be discussed are given.

Texts

Descartes, R. Meditations. (Bobbs-Merrilledition).

Berkeley, G. Three Dialogues. (Bobbs-Merrill edition).

Russell, B. The Problems of Philosophy. (Oxford).

Topics and Readings

Part I: Introduction to Deductive Logic.
Day 1: Theories of truth; propositions versus sentences.
Reading: handout (glossary of terms).

Theories of truth are discussed and compared: correspondence theory, subjective theory, and coherence theory. An argument against certain forms of the subjective theory is discussed: since the middle ages the shape of the earth has not changed, even though people's beliefs about it have changed. Propositions as bearers of truth values are discussed and distinguished from sentences.

Day 2: Necessity, Contingency, Possibility, Impossibility.
Reading: handout (glossary of terms).

Modal concepts defined both in terms of possible worlds and subjunctive conditionals.

Day 3: A Priori/A Posteriori.
Reading: handout (glossary of terms).

The distinction between a priori and a posteriors knowledge is introduced

p is knowable a priori if and only if
(i) understandings is sufficient for coming to know p, or
(ii) p is deducible from a proposition that satisfies (i).

p is knowable a posteriori if and only if p is not knowable a priori.

Day 4: Validity and Invalidity of Arguments.
Reading: handout (glossary of terms).

Various definitions and distinctions concerning arguments are introduced. Examples of various valid and invalid arguments and argument forms are discussed.

• An argument is a set of two or more propositions, one of which is a conclusion, and the rest of which are premises.
• An argument is valid if and only if necessarily, if its premises are true then its conclusion is true.
• An argument is invalid if and only if possibly, its premises are true and its conclusion is false.
• An argument is sound if and only if possibly, its premises are true and its conclusion is false.
• An argument is unsound if and only if it is either invalid or has a false premise.

Day 5: Syllogistic Forms.
Reading: handout of forms.

Definition of syllogism is given; limitations of syllogistic logic are discussed. (See Ackrill, Aristotle the Philosopher, for a good discussion of syllogistic logic). Examples, including common forms.

Day 6: Propositional Forms.
Reading: handout of forms.

Definition of a propositional argument is given. Limitations of propositional logic are discussed. Examples, including common forms (modus ponens, modus tollens, etc.).

Day 7: Unit Exam.

Part II: Descartes and Rationalism.
Days 8 and 9: Descartes, The Crisis of Belief, and the Scientific Revolution.

Discrediting of the method of authority by the scientific revolution. Descartes' search for a scientific method. His assumption of the axiomatic method because of the success of mathematics and its close connection with science.

Day 10: Philosophical Analysis. The Concept of Knowledge. Skepticism.
Reading: Russell, chapter 13.

Analysis of a concept in terms of necessary and sufficient conditions. Knowledge as justified true belief. Examples of unjustified true belief, justified false belief. A good example for illustrating necessary and sufficient conditions is the concept of a bachelor (unmarried, male, adult, human, never married before . . . ).

Day 11: The Axiomatic Method in Epistemology. The Role of the Method of Doubt.
Reading: Descartes, Meditation I.

Discussion of foundationalism in epistemology, Descartes' method as foundational, Euclidean Geometry -- Descartes' model, the method of doubt and the search for axioms.

Days 12, 13: Descartes' Skeptical Arguments: Sensory Illusions Dreaming, and the Evil Demon.
Reading: Descartes, Meditation I.

Descartes' skeptical arguments. Examples:

Sense Perception Argument:

1. Beliefs based on a source of information which is sometimes mistaken are uncertain.
2. Sense-perception is a source of information which is sometimes mistaken, e.g., illusions, mirages, etc.
3. Beliefs based on sense-pereception are uncertain.
4. Beliefs about physical objects or persons other than oneself are based on sense-perception.
5. Beliefs about physical objects or persons other than oneself are uncertain

Dream Argument:

1. For any waking experiences, it is possible for one to have dream experiences which are indistinguishable in their qualitative sensory content from those waking experiences.
2. If so, then one can never know for certain whether one is awake or dreaming.
3. If so, then one can never know for certain anything about physical objects or persons other than oneself

Discuss Evil Demon argument.

Day 14: The Cogito and Other Axiomatic Truths.
Reading: Descartes, Meditation II.

Discussion of the fact that it is impossible to be mistaken if you think that you exist, or think that you think, etc.

Days 15, 16: Descartes' Conception of the Self, and the Mind/Body Problem.
Reading: Descartes, Meditation II.

Definitions of accidental and essentiad properties.

P is an essential property of x = df. (i) x has P, and (ii) it is impossible for x to exist and lack P.

P is an accidental property of x = df. (i) x has P, and (ii) it is possible for x to exist and lack P.

Descartes' argument that he is essentially a thinking thing:

1. If, in order to know that x exists for certain you have to know that x has P, then p is essential to X.
2. In order to know for certain that I exist, I have to know for certain that I think.
3. Thinking is essential to me.

Definitions of materialism, dualism, etc. Considerations of some arguments in favor of dualism. Examples:

1. I know for certain that I exist.
2. I do not know for certain that my body exists.
3. I am not identical with my bode.

1. When I die, I cease to exist.
2. After death, my body continues to exist.
3. I am not identical with my body.

Day 17: Knowledge of Bodies: The Piece of Wax Argument
Reading: Descartes, Meditation II.

Consideration of various arguments in Descartes. Examples:

Piece of Wax Argument

1. Knowledge of bodies is knowledge of their essential properties.
2. All of the particular sensible properties of bodies can change while the bodies continue to exist.
3. All of the particular sensible properties of bodies are accidental properties.
4. There is no knowledge of bodies by means of the senses.

The mind is more easily known than the body:

1. If in order to know that X exists, you must know that Y exists, but not vice versa, then Y is more easily known than X.
2. In order to know that a body exists, you must know that your mind exists, but not vice versa.
3. Therefore, mind is more easily known than body.

Day 18: The Ascent from Foundation.
Reading: Descartes, Meditation III.

Discussions of Descartes' plan: I exist, I think, I have certain ideas --> God exists --> the external world exists.

Days 19, 20: Arguments for the Existence of God.
Reading: Descartes, Meditation III.

Definitions of formal and objective reality, degrees of reality. Discussion of Descartes' proof for the existence of God.

1. I have an idea of God (a perfect being).
2. The idea of God has infinite objective reality.
3. If an idea has infinite objective reality, then its cause has infinite formal reality.
4. Only God can have infinite formal reality.
5. God is the cause of my idea of God.

Day 21: Unit Exam.

Part III: Berkeley's Empirical Idealism.
Day 22: Locke: Primary and Secondary Qualities, and the Representational Theory of Perception.

Representational theory of perception, Locke's definitions of primary and secondary qualities. Definitions of direct realism and indirect realism

.

Day 23: Berkeley's Empiricism.

Berkeley's general aims: to refute the skepticism inherent in Representational (Indirect) Realism; to combat atheistic tendencies of modern science; and to defend "common sense".

Days 24-26: Berkeley's Attack on Representational Realism.
Reading: Berkeley, First Dialogue.

Berkeley's relativity of sense-perception argument; the parity between primary and secondary qualities. Example:

Heat/Pain Argument:

1. If something is indistinguishable from a pain, then it is a pain.
2. A great degree of heat is indistinguishable from a pain.
3. A great degree of heat is pain.
4. A pain cannot exist unperceived.
5. A great degree of heat cannot exist unperceived.
6. If a great degree of heat cannot exist unperceived, then no degree of heat can exist unperceived.
7. No degree of heat can exist unperceived

Other Arguments of Berkeley Against Representational Realism:

1. Houses, mountains and trees are objects of the senses.
2. The objects of the senses are ideas.
3. Ideas cannot exist unperceived.
4. Houses, mountains and trees cannot exist unperceived.

In support of (2):

1. Whatever is perceived is immediately perceived.
2. Only ideas are immediately perceived.
3. Only ideas are perceived.

In support of the premise that all perception is immediate, consider Berkeley's distinction between perception and inference.

Days 27-29: Berkeley's Critique of the Notion of Matter.
Reading: Berkeley, Second Dialogue.

Berkeley's critique of matter. Empiricist conception of meaning: all concepts derive from what we directly experience. At best we only experience properties, and not any underlying matter. Hence, the notion of matter has no empirical content, and is meaningless.

1. Matter can, by definition, exist unconceived.
2. It is impossible to conceive of a material object which is unconceived of.
3. Matter is impossible.

1. Matter is defined in terms of size, shape, etc.
2. The size, shape, etc., of matter resemble our ideas of them.
3. An idea can only resemble another idea.
4. Size, shape, etc., are ideas.
5. Matter, by definition, can exist unperceived.
6. Ideas cannot exist unperceived.
7. The properties of matter cannot exist unperceived.
8. Matter cannot exist unperceived.
9. Matter is impossible.

Days 30-32: Berkeley's Defense of Idealism.
Reading: Berkeley, Third Dialogue.

How the idealist distinguishes dreaming from waking, veridical from nonveridical perception. How the idealist can say that houses, cats, and trees persist when we are not observing them. Paw thus illeffllict non Ha science

Discussion of some difficulties with Berkeley's views. Discussion of whether Berkeley's view or Locke's view is a better explanation of experience.

Day 33: Unit Exam.

Part IV: Russell and Scientific Realism.
Days 34-36: Appearance and Reality; the Existence and Nature of Matter.
Reading: Russell, chapters 1-3.

The relativity of sense-perception argument for primary and secondary qualities. The scientific argument for this distinction between prunary and secondary qualities. Russell's defense of scientific realism. Russell's argument that realism is a better explanation of our experience than is idealism. Criteria for inference to the best explanation.

Days 37-38: Knowledge by Aquaintance and Knowledge by Description.
Reading: Russell, chapter 5.

The extent and modes of knowledge by acquaintance. Knowledge by acquaintance as foundational. Definition of knowledge by description. Knowledge by description as ascent from the foundation. Russell's theory of proper names and demonstratives. The role of knowledge by description in the realist program.

Days 39-41: Inductive Reasoning and the Problem of Induction.
Reading: Russell, chapter 6.

The difference between inductive and deductive reasoning. Hume's problem of induction. Russell's a prioristic reply to Hume.

Days 42-44: Universals and Particulars.
Reading: Russell, chapters 9 and 10.

Definitions of universals and particulars. Russell's theory of knowledge of universals: by abstraction from experience of particulars. Russell's theory that a priori knowledge of the relations of universals. Platonism versus nominalism.

Formal Cause Argument:

1. Morris, Felix and Garfield are all cats.
2. There must be something about them which accounts for all of them being cats.
3. This something can onlY be their catness.
4. There is catness.

Translation argument: there are truths about universals which cannot be translated into truths solely about concrete things, e.g., "there are shapes which are unexemplified.''