Jobcie HW 3 Empiricist Epistemology PDF

Preview

Summary

The entire assignment...

Description

Name: Jobcie Portilus

HW 3 – Empiricist Epistemology Philosophy (Love of Wisdom) HW Does the Center Hold? – Chapter 3: Empiricist Epistemology

Choose one of the following questions (A, B, C, or D) and respond to it briefly. A) Ask someone a philosophical question. a. What did you ask? b. How did they respond? c. What happened next? B) Look at something in a new way (maybe through the lens of a philosopher or a topic in our class). a. What did you look at? b. What was new about the way you looked at it? C) Write a question about content in our class (ideally related to the topic or chapter covered by this HW). D) Identify a quote from the book that stands out to you and explain WHY you selected that quote. -

One quote that stand out to me is one from William of Ockham which states: “what can be done with fewer (terms) is done in vain with more. It stood out to me because it was compatible with all observable data.

1)

(General Self-Reflection) Respond to at least one of the following questions: a) What statement, made by another student, stands out to you at the moment? Why does it stand out? b) What is one concept on which you gained clarity in our most recent class? What is one concept that is still unclear for you, and how can you go about clarifying it? - In our most recent class, I gained more clarity in radicalism as well as empiricism. No concepts are unclear to me.

2)

(Rationalism review, synthesis, and wrap-up) Briefly, but thoughtfully respond: a) Imagine that all of the information in the rationalism chapter was a response to a question. What do you think that question was? -Where does knowledge originate?

3)

b)

List some core concepts that were important for analyzing (and understanding) rationalism. (Example: a priori) - a Priori knowledge, Plato’s forms, Experience, statements, Truth condition, etc.

c)

In one or two sentences, state the main answer/conclusion that the chapter provides to the question you identified above. -All knowledge, the empiricist argues, arises through, and is reducible to sense perception. Thus there is no knowledge that arises through reason alone.

d)

Briefly explain the justification/reasoning/evaluation that the chapter would likely use to support that conclusion. -First of all, the main topic in this chapter is about empiricism, so it would be like bias in the sense of only getting to that conclusion

If a tree falls in the forest when there’s no one around to hear it, does it make a sound? Why or why not? Provide a thorough explanation in your own words. -No, In reality, nothing makes a sound because it is an illusion. The concept of sound takes place in one’s brain. Sound doesn’t take place in the real world rather, when various things happen, a sound can be created.

©Kimber 2018

a) Is the tree in the forest real? That is, how do you know that the external world exists/is real? -The concept of sound or our other senses relates to what we can know of reality, therefore, the tree exists.

4)

As you responded to the questions above, you thought about knowledge (epistemology) and reality (ontology). Can you think of any other questions that you have asked in your life that were epistemological questions or ontological questions? If so, write one or two of them here and explain the connection. - Epistemology question: How can we believe in something that we can’t see? -Ontology question: Does heaven exist?

-In order to have an ontological question, you need to have beliefs and those beliefs constitute knowledge

5)

How and what do you learn from your senses? Provide at least 3 examples and explain the role your senses played in gaining/acquiring/causing that knowledge. 1) To taste food. How? Through taste buds. When we put food in our mouths, a signal goes to our brain letting us know whether it is sweet, salty, sour or bitter 2) Distinguish different materials through touch. This knowledge can be acquired by touching various materials. 3)To feel pain. This knowledge can be acquired when touching something hot causing pain.

6)

Imagine there is a frog on the table in front of you. a) Describe some primary qualities of the frog. (This concept is in the reading.) -Its is one frog -It hops -It is small

b)

7)

What is causality (not casualty)? - The principle that everything has a cause a)

8)

Describe some secondary qualities of the frog. (This concept is in the reading) -It is slimy -It is green -It croaks

Provide an example. - A pinprick causes pain or brain damage causes mental illness

When you are on the phone with someone (or if you receive a text message), make note of at least one statement that they make and write it down. (It may help to choose something simple, like “I just saw a bird.”) ©Kimber 2018

a)

Statement: I bought a BMW

b)

Where is that knowledge (ex. that a bird flew by) for the person you are talking to, and how did they acquire that knowledge? Explain. - This is from their own experience and acquired that knowledge because BMW’s are expensive cars

c)

9)

Where is that knowledge (ex. about the bird) for you, and how did you acquire it? Explain. -I acquired this knowledge from what I was told. In reality, I don’t know if the car was really bought

Do you think that all people perceive time in the same way? Do you think there are any animals or other creatures that perceive time differently than humans? -No -Yes, for example: flies

10) What are “categories of the understanding” for Immanuel Kant? (in the book) Can you think of an example of how they work? - Formal and active features of the mind imposed a kind of order on the raw data of the senses. -Examples of them would be: unity, plurality, and totality

11) (Rationalism & Empiricism Synthesis – Challenge) Rationalist thinkers argue that knowledge comes from innate ideas and is accessed/learned by way of reason, and empiricist thinkers argue that knowledge comes from senses and experience. Immanuel Kant’s theory provides a solution to the rationalism and empiricism debate. Can you see how? (Do your best or take a guess here.) - For Kant, the distinction between priori and posteriori judgements must be kept separate because it is possible to be synthetic and a priori at the same time.

©Kimber 2018...