Philosophy 107 (2-19-20) PDF

Preview

Summary

Taught by Neil Tognazzini...

Description

Philosophy 107 2/19/20 Diagnostic Arguments: -

A diagnostic argument is one where the conclusion (and/or the rivals) explains at least one piece of support o The IQ always asks for an explanation o The rivals are all explanations of the initial puzzling clues o Some of the support helps us to rank the rivals because it is explained by the rivals

Traces and Non-Traces -

Diagnostic arguments contain two general types of support: o Trace Data (TD): Support that the rivals are explaining o Non-trace Data (NTD): Support that the rivals are not explaining, but that help us see that the rivals are better or worse explanations.

A Warning: -

Compare: o “This explains why we think the conclusion is true.” -- support o “This is explained by the conclusion.” – TRACE DATA

CTD & PTD -

-

-

Some support is trace data if some of the rivals explain it But there are two different types of trade data worth distinguishing: o Central Trace Data (CTD): The TD that any serious rival must explain. o Peripheral Trace Data (PTD): TD that not ever rivals needs to explain, but that some do (or at least should) Consider the connection between an argument and an investigation. o 1. We find traces, which puzzle us and lead us to ask our diagnostic IQ: What explains these traces? o 2. Those traces and the IQ determine the list of serious rivals – stories that explain the traces, and those traces turn into support as CTD o 3. Those serious rivals now guide our search for additional support: is there anything else about the situation that one or more of these rivals would explain or that one or more of these rivals would have difficulty explaining? o 4. If so, then those additional traces turn into support at PTD. It’s not what got the argument going in the first place, but its explanatory relationship to one or more of our serious rivals is notable. The only tricky thing about PTD is that it can be negatively as well as positively relevant o CTD is always evidence for PTD, can be evidence for or evidence against

-

After the CTD determines the list of serious rivals, the investigators’ conversation might continue in one of two ways: o 1. “That rival makes a lot of sense, actually, because there’s this other fact about the situation that it would explain.” (Positive PTD) o 2. “Okay, but that rivals doesn’t seem very plausible because there’s this other fact about the situation that is has trouble explaining.” (Negative PTD)

Explanatory Resources: -

-

In general, a piece of support is an explanatory resource if… o It affects the ease with which a rival can explain some TD. Come in two varieties: o General Explanatory Resources (GER): And piece of general information (GUS) that affects the ease with which a rival can explain the TD. o Local explanatory resources (LER): Any piece information specifically about the case at hand that affects the ease with which a rival can explain the TD How do we decide what resources are worth putting into an argument? o Include it in an argument IF AND ONLY IF YOUR AUDIENCE NEEDS IT....