Philosophy 101: Week 3

Week 3 was a bit of a challenge because we had company and I was also sick for part of it. But never fear, Underdog was here.

So, in the reading department, I had to accomplish the following:
In my text book, Life’s Ultimate Questions by Ronald Nash, there were two chapters to be read. One of Aristotle and the other on Augustine. Each chapter covered their main contributions to the Philosophical debate and briefly touched on the history of their thought (how their ideas were formed) and what their ideas meant within their current cultural context. There was also some selected readings from Aristotle’s Nichomachean Ethics and Augustine’s On Free Choice of the Will.

The two questions for week 3’s mandatory online discussion were as follows:
1. What is your opinion of Augustine’s Truth Argument for God’s existence? How does this embody Augustine’s worldview? Which premises seem most open to objection?
2. What do you think is the function of human beings according to contemporary science?

To expand a bit on question 1, here is the Truth Argument that Augustine presents for God’s existence:
1. Truth exists
2. Truth is immutable (unchangeable)
3. Truth is eternal
4. Truth is mental (pertaining to mind or minds)
5. Truth is superior to the human mind
So, 6. Truth is God

These statements can be constructed in the following manner to create a modus ponens statement.
1. If 1-5 is true, then God exists
2. 1-5 is true,
So, 3. God exists

Finally, I had to write another short essay discussing whether human beings have a purpose or an end, then explain the answer.

Philosophy 101: Quick Update

Nearly at the half-way point and I have a 95% average in class - so I’m pretty happy with that so far.

I hope to update what has been happening in class for weeks 3 & 4 (current week).

Philosophy 101: Week 2, Day 4

Week 2 and all is well…

This weeks assignments were about on the same level as Week 1, although the discussion questions this week were a bit more in depth than last weeks.

This week we had to read Plato’s Phaedo which I have read before, so I just skimmed through it quickly to pick up the high points again. We also had to read a couple of chapters in out text book Life’s Ultimate Questions by Ronald Nash, on worldviews (what they are, how to test them, etc.) and a chapter that was an introduction to Plato and Platonic thought. Thankfully I had already read this a few weeks ago, so I was ahead of the game and it just required a quick skim back over the chapters to refresh some things.

Again, we had two questions for mandatory discussion (DQ).

1. Do you agree with Plato’s claim that only what is unchangeable can be known? why or why not?
2. Discuss the following position: “All claims about reality can be evaluated using simple sense perception.”

Also, we had another short 400 word minimum essay to write. The topic was “discuss your present worldview and how it would affect any philosophical arguments you would make.”

To give short answers, I will say:
DQ1: I do not agree with Plato. It is possible to know something of things that change.
DQ2: The claim is false - it is self-refuting. What sense perception was used to prove that factualness of the statement itself?

Philosophy 101: Week 1, Day 3

Well, I had all of my homework done by the first evening of class. I had to answer 2 discussion questions on their message board put out by the instructor and I had to write a 400 (minimum) short essay. Other than that, the remainder of the week is just joining in discussions with the other students in my class regarding the discussion questions. Since I am sort of a self-proclaimed professional at message board posting it’s an easy ongoing assignment for me - lol

Because I don’t want to suffer this all alone, I’ll share a little of what we are doing and see what responses, if any, I get on some of the questions I’ve had to answer so far.

Discussion Questions:
1. Find an argument in the newspaper editorial page, on television, or through some other media. Try to formulate it as either a modus ponens or modus tollens argument. Then explain whether (in your thoughtful opinion) the argument is sound. (I’ll explain modus ponens, modus tollens, and sound argument after the second question).

2. Discuss the following famous claim (made by the ancient Greek philosopher Socrates): “The unexamined life is not worth living.”

Arguments follow certain patterns to determine their validity. Arguments are comprised of a series of premises (statements) and end with a conclusion. The statements are meant to be truth-claims and the conclusion is meant to necessarily follow from them. What determines if an argument is valid or not is the pattern that it follows. Modus ponen and modus tollens are two examples of valid argument patterns. Examples follow:

Modus Ponens: (A and B stand for any truth-claim)
1. If A is true, then B is true.
2. A is true.
So, 3. B is true.

A shortened version of this looks like:
1. If A, then B.
2. A.
So (or Therefore), 3. B

1. If Socrates is a man, then Socrates is mortal
2. Socrates is a man
Therefore, 3. Socrates is mortal.

Pretty easy, eh?

Modus Tollens:
1. If A is true, then B is true.
2. B is not true,
So, 3. A is not true.

A shortened version:
1. If A, then B.
2. Not-B.
So, 3. Not-A.

1. If Socrates is a dog, then Socrates is an animal.
2. Socrates is not an animal
Therefore, 3. Socrates is not a dog.

Also straight forward and easy. These are pretty basic and there are other forms that can get very complex. Perhaps later I’ll post some of those.

Sound Argument: A sound argument is one in that meets two following bits of criteria. 1. The argument is valid and 2. the premises are true. It is possible to have a valid argument and the argument not be sound. For example:
1. If elves exist, then they are tall and slender with pointy ears
2. Elves exist.
Therefore, 3. They all are tall and slender with pointy ears.

While this argument is valid (statement 3. [conclusion], follows necessarily from statements 1. & 2. [premises]), but it is not sound because the the premises (statements 1. & 2.) are not true.

Finally, my short essay had to be written on the following topic: “It doesn’t make any difference whether you arrive at your views based on reasoning or not.” Then I had to write in either for or against this position.

Another From Lewis

Time and Tide

Among the hills a meteorite
Lies huge; and moss has overgrown,
And wind and rain with touches light
Made soft, the contours of the stone.

Thus easily can Earth digest
A cinder of sidereal fire,
And make her translunary guest
The native of an English shire.

Nor is it strange these wanderers
Find in her lap their fitting place,
For every particle that’s hers
Came at the first from outer space.

All that is Earth has once been sky;
Down from the sun of old she came,
Or from some start that travelled by
Too close to his entangling flame.

Hence, if belated drops yet fall
From heaven, on these her plastic power
Still works as once it worked on all
The glad rush of the golden shower.

- C.S. Lewis

Next Page »