7184036
Descripción
Fichas por Nicole Dane, actualizado hace más de 1 año
|
|
Creado por Nicole Dane
hace casi 8 años
|
|
| Pregunta | Respuesta |
| Descartes's Argument Foundationalism | - More complex beliefs rest on simple beliefs - Descartes realizes he doesn't believe all of which he used to believe, causing some of his basic beliefs to be untrue - All of which he believes, which was built upon his original beliefs, can now be doubted |
| Descartes's Argument: Scepticism | - Descartes must doubt everything he believes, due to the unreliable beliefs he once based everything he knew and believed upon. - One must not believe anything unless they are 100% sure said thing is true. - Descartes hopes to subject the building of his beliefs to as much pressure as possible, and it remains standing, he will know his beliefs are secure. |
| Descartes's Argument: Doubt | -The things Descartes is most confident are true, he has acquired empirically, through the senses (seeing, smelling, feeling, etc.) - You cannot always rely on your senses to be accurate. Anything which has tricked us even once, we should not trust fully again. - Sometimes Descartes observations are false, but he is looking for absolute certainty. EVERYTHING MUST BE DOUBTED. |
| Descartes's Argument: Doubt Argument (Real vs. Not Real) | - Argument of Sceptic: EVERYTHING MUST BE DOUBTED. - Response to Sceptic: It is true that sometimes I can be deceived, but there are some things that MUST be true. Ex. I am sitting here and I exist. - Response of Sceptic: This could all be a dream. (not actually saying we are all dreaming, simply going to the extreme to prove his point) - Response to Sceptic: Our dreams are built out of experiences we have, so we must know that we have had real experiences. At least the colours must exist in the real world, which we see in our dreams. - Conclusion opposing Sceptic: Therefore, physical objects, like shapes and colours, must be real. Ex. We did not create the idea of a tree, it existed and we viewed it, felt it, smelled it, etc. We did not create the colour red, it is bright and strong and red, and we just view it. |
| Descartes's Argument: Doubt Argument (God) | - Sceptic: What if God exists, and that he is creating all of this, so none of it is truly real outside of our own minds. - Response to Sceptic: God is good, which must mean he would not create a whole reality that does not exist. He would not want to trick us if he was good. - Response of Sceptic: If God has created me to be tricked and deceived by my senses all of the time, than how can I know he does not deceive me all of the time. It is not God, who is naturally good, who deceives me. It is some evil being, also all powerful, who deceives me. |
| Descartes's Argument: Free Will | - We have free will, which allows us to doubt such things that most people believe, or we previously believed. |
| Descartes's Argument: Free Will (The Basic Argument - Strawson) | (1) You do what you do — in the circumstances in which you find yourself—because of the way you then are. (2) So if you’re going to be ultimately responsible for what you do, you’re going to have to be ultimately responsible for the way you are — at least in certain mental respects. (3) But you can’t be ultimately responsible for the way you are in any respect at all. (4) So you can’t be ultimately responsible for what you do. |
| Descartes's Argument: Free Will (McEwan's Argument) | - Humans are still responsible for their actions, because whether it is our fault, it is our action. - Ex. If our dog bites someone, despite it not being our fault, we still must take responsibility for it. |
| Descartes's Argument: Voluntarism | - But whoever turns out to have created us, and however powerful and however deceitful he may be, in the meantime we nonetheless experience within us the kind of freedom which enables us always to refrain from believing things which are not completely certain and thoroughly examined. - Hence we are able to take precautions against going wrong on any occasion. |
| Descartes's Argument: Voluntarism (Williams) | 1) Beliefs aim at truth: (a) We assess beliefs by their truth and falsehood. (b) To believe that p is to believe that p is true. (c) To say ‘I believe that p’ is to assert that p is true. (What would happen if you were to express that belief) 2) 2. And so one cannot acquire beliefs at will. (You cannot just choose to believe something, even if you wish to believe it) |
| Descartes's Argument: Cogito ergo sum | - Doubt all you want, YOU ARE DOUBTING, so there must be a doubter. No matter what, there is a being engaging in doubt, which must mean that something is existing, if they are capable of doubt. - If it thinks, it exists. - The ‘I’ that is proven to exist here is not matter, its not a body. The ‘I’ that we know to exist is the mind. Knowledge of our minds is more certain than knowledge of corporeal things. - You can imagine yourself to be walking or seeing things when you are not actually walking or seeing anything. However, you cannot imagine yourself to be thinking, because that in itself is you thinking. |
| Descartes's Argument: Cogito ergo sum (Argument) | - Objection: If we are doubting everything, than how can we even manage to rely on out logical inferences. - Response: "This inner awareness of one's thoughts and existence is innate in all men." |
| Descartes's Argument: Dualism | - I know that the me of which I am certain of, cannot be my body, because I know that my body is something I can doubt (anything within time and space - matter - can be doubted). The me of which I am certain is my soul, which reveals the distinction between my soul and body. |
| Descartes's Argument: Dualism (Hobbes) | - Doubting could be a thing that a body does, it could be an experience had by a material thing. - Hobbes says that you do not know whether or not the brain (or another material thing which thinks) exists, you have not proven that it does not. |
| Descartes's Argument: Dualism (Elisabeth's Criticism) | - If the experiences I have are not in my body, how does something immaterial cause my body to do something that it does? - Well, if they are, they don’t do anything, so there is not much point to believe they exist. - If the soul is immaterial, how can it effect the body? - The body is an automatic extension of the mind (if it exists). There is a union between the two, and they are only united in a way that a mind and body (immaterial and material) can be. - I did not understand what you were saying about the union between mind and body. Unfortunately, I do not have time to continue to consider and understand this idea. I am very busy, and am often being called on. I do not have time to engage in these philosophical ideas. |
¿Quieres crear tus propias Fichas gratiscon GoConqr? Más información.