Intro to Philosophy

University of New Orleans

What is Philosophy

• Bertrand RussellPhilosophy is an intermediary of theology and Science• Philosophy is not a world view• Etymology of the Word“Love of Wisdom”

What is Philosophy

• Definition of the WordInvestigating underlying reasons for realityUnderstanding based on logical reasoning rather than empirical methods• AnalogyPsychology is a science that studies mental processes and behaviorsPhilosophy comes from reason

Just like psychology, philosophy has subfields

What is Philosophy

• Philosophical QuestionsFundamental, open questions that cannot be solved through experienceWhat must or mustn’t be the case based on preconceptionsWhat is mind vs Nature of the Mind Not Philosophical Philosophical

• Conflict between ideas creates fundamental questionsView that mind is different than brainView that mind is brainView that mind is controlled by brain

Which is most reasonable to believe

What is Philosophy• Must use reason to resolveScientific evidence can be used, but answer must be based on reasonCritical Reasoning• Need to communicate on equitable termsPhilosophy is finding the truthMust use common meanings• Philosophy is settled through argument• Two Parts of Every ArgumentClaim Anyone can makeSupporting Evidence DifficultE.g. God is not perfect because his creation is imperfect Claim Evidence

Subfields of Psychology• History of PsychologyStudy of the emergence of PsychologyCompare and ContrastPlato vs Descartes, importance of dualism, etc…• Philosophy of ReligionNature of GodWhat is God• EpistemologyEpi- Has to do with knowledgeNature and origin of knowledge

Knowledge is specialDifferent than belief

How to acquire, innate knowledge, rationalists, empiricists, etc…

Subfields of Psychology• MetaphysicsQuestions about existanceDoes God exist?

Reasons for and againstEssence of the MindWhat makes a person a personWhat makes a person the same person over time

If different, is it just to punish you for something you did yesterday?• Socio-Political PhilosophyJustice, Order, and AuthorityIdealistHow it ought to be

Subfields of Psychology• Philosophy of the mindDifferent than psychologyPredates• Philosophy of LanguageNature of language

Syntax is necessaryOrganizationSyntax refers to the form, semantics the content

Can we have thoughts without language• Philosophy of ScienceAssumptions of the limitations of Science• AestheticsPrinciples of Art formsPurpose and importance of ArtWhat is Art?

Subfields of Psychology• LogicGood Reasoning vs. Bad ReasoningWhat makes an assumption dubious• EthicsStudy for what we should do morallyConcepts and permissions for what is morally permissible, impermissible, and obligatory• Normative DisciplinesLogic and EthicsWhat we should do to get a desired result• Descriptive DisciplineHow to do/WhyAll other subfields of Psychology

Misconceptions of Philosophy

• You have to be wise to be a philosopherPhilosophy is reason, not spewing witticisms• Assertion makes you a philosopher• Everyone’s opinion is equal to another'sAn experts opinion is worth more than yours• You will always get the truthTruth is aim, but it may boil down to an educated guess• It is criticalPhilosophy is critical of Views, not people

Reasons for Philosophy

• Independent thinking and tolerance increases• Awareness of ambiguities and fallacies in

arguments• Compels to take a reason for what others

believe is self-evident• Compels to think, rather than memorizing

definitions

Arguments

• Main use for reason is argumentsLogic is devoted to the art of arguments• Arguments are everywhere• Formal LanguageNo artificial language or symbols• Informal LanguagePowerful

What is an Argument

• What someone offers through language to show truth• Consists of a claim supported by evidence• Standard Form ArgumentExplicitly numberConclusion at the bottom next to therefore symbolLine separating evidence from claimEasy to evaluate, reveals logical structure• ProseMore difficult to recognize

How to Recognize an Argument

• IndicatorsClaims

Therefore, accordingly, so, hence, etc…Evidence

Because, first, from, since, etc…

Useful Generalizations About Arguments

• May occur anywhere in a passage• Evidence and Claims are relative termsDepends on role in an argument• Every premise/evidence is an assumptionDon’t explain evidenceTruth is presupposedImplicit Assumption

Hidden assumptionExplicit Assumption

Shown AssumptionsDubious Assumption

Wrong assumption

Assumptions

• Because no academy award winning actor has ever won a Noble Prize, Kevin Spacey has never won an academy award

Underlined is explicitImplicit assumptions

Kevin Spacey has won a noble prizeIt is possible to win a noble prizeNoble Prize exists

• Cats Love TunaImplicit assumptions

Cats existCats eat tuna

Assumptions

• Some conclusions can be assumedAll cheaters are dishonest, and you are a cheater

Conclusion is that you are dishonest• Rhetorical QuestionsQuestions can never be conclusions, because they can never be true or false

They have no truth valueAvoid when offering evidence

Background Information

• Not every statement has to be evidence or a conclusion

Background information can be usedThe iPhone, which was created by Apple,

introduced the concept of a multi-touch interface, completely revolutionizing the phone industry.

Evaluating Arguments

• For an argument to be good, it must not violate the principles of good reasoning

• Cogent ArgumentGood argument• Fallacious ArgumentBad argument

The RIFUT Rule

• For an argument to be cogent, it must be:RelevantIndependent of the ConclusionFree of Dubious AssumptionsUnambiguousTrue and Consistent

Truth and Consistency of Argument

• Can’t know anything if it is untrue• Definite refutation if evidence is proven false• ConsistencySet of statements that can all be proven trueInconsistent if all cannot be simultaneously true

Definite refutationKilling is immoral, killing in self-

defense is moral

Independence of Argument

• Cannot show claim is true by assuming claim is true

• Cannot restate claim as evidenceGod created the world, and therefore he exists

Circular Argument• Not all valid arguments are good arguments• Never assume the truth of conclusion when

providing evidence

Free of Dubious Assumptions• Fallacy of presumptionAssume something unproven and unreasonable is a truth• Fallacy of CompositionBecause part of ___ has ___, all of ___ has ___Assumes what’s true of part is true of the whole• Fallacy of DivisionAssumes what’s true of whole is true of partsCannot go from whole to part or visa-versa • False Dilemma/Black and White FallacyOversimplifies complex issue by stating fewer sides than there are and demanding a decision“If you don’t support gay rights, you are a homophobe”

Relevance• Fallacy of RelevanceDoes an argument commit a non-sequitur

Claim does not follow from evidence• Ad HominemPerson A attacks Person B to discredit argument“Don’t attack the messenger”• Ad Populum Appeal to people to win support for claims

Do something because other people doEvoke emotions

• Appeal to IgnoranceClaim true because hasn’t been proven false, or visa-versa• Appeal to Inappropriate AuthorityAppeal to expert regarding something other than area of expertiseMichael Jordan wears these sneakers, so you should too

Relevance

• Genetic FallacyAttribute validity on basis of origin“Planned parenthood was founded by a racist, so the organization is racist”

Other Fallacies• Straw ManExaggerate/Misrepresent than attack the exaggerated version• Slippery Slope FallacyDistorts view and claims one thing will lead to undesired consequences, therefore it is invalid• Irrelevent Conclusion FallacyCatch-all“Sophie is a cat who likes tuna, so the full moon eats people”• Red Herring FallacyWhere something unrelated to the topic at hand is used to divert from it“I don’t want to go to school, the gas price is too high and driving there would be expensive”

History of Philosophy

• Four periods of Western PhilosophyAncient PeriodMedieval PeriodModern PeriodContemporary Period

Ancient Philosophy (6th century B.C.)

• Begins in Greece• PresocraticsPhilosophers before SocratesFirst people to give non-religious answers to fundamental questions in Western Philosophy

MalaysiansDealt with Cosmological Questions about the nature of the universe

PythagorasCoined the term Philosopher

XenophanesCreated Epistemology, Rational Theology

AnaxagorasCharged with impiety

Ancient Philosophy (6th century B.C.)

• SophistsItinerant teachers who taught common people how to argue• Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle

Medieval Period (11th-14th century)• Dominated by Catholic Church• St. Anselm, St. Thomas Aquinas• Jewish and Muslim philosophers reintroduce Roman culture to the

world• Achem’s RazorSimpler of two arguments, with all else being equal, will more likely be correct• St. Francis BaconDesigns Scientific Method• Thomas Hobbes Leviathan explains how society emerges from natureSocio-Political Philosopher

Modern Period (16th-18th Century)

• Rene DescartesFather of Modern Philosophy • Major philosophies of the time were Rationalism and

Empiricism• Baruch Spinoza Key Rationalist• John LockeKey Empiricist• Immanuel KantMoral Theory; based on duty

Contemporary Period (19th century-Modern Times)

• Continental PhilosophyExistentialism, Socialism, Feminism, etc…Marx, Heidegger, Nietzsche, etc…Mainly on European Continent • Anglo-American PhilosophyAnalytic PhilosophyUtilitarianism, PragmatismWilliam James, Bertrand Russell, CamusMainly England and America

Socrates (469-399 B.C.)

• Wrote Nothing• Against empirical knowledge• Associated with justice, morals, ethics• Socratic MethodQuestion and answer method• Taught Plato, who taught Aristotle

Plato

• Father of idealism, rationalism, socio-political philosophy

• The RepublicDialogue concerning ideal state• Founded the AcademyPrototype of all Western Universities

Included MathematicsLasted 900 years

Plato’s Apology

• One of Plato’s many dialoguesSocrates is main character• Athens trial in 399Athens was true Democracy, all citizen participate fully• AccusersMeletus , Antius bring charges

Corrupting youth, impietySocrates criticizers

Many people slander him

Socrates’ Defense

• Claims he doesn’t deal with physical matters• Claims he is not a teacherHe knows nothing, does not travel, does not take money• Origin of troubleAsked Oracle if anyone was wiser than he

Oracle says noSets out on religious quest to find someone wiser

than himGoes to people who claim to have wisdomThrough Socratic Method, embarrasses themPoliticians, Poets, Artisans

Socrates’ Defense

• MeletusRepresents poetsClaims everyone besides Socrates elevates youth; and eventually that Socrates intentionally harms youth

Socrates says no one intentionally harms himself, so why would he harm children if it would hurt him by association

If Meletus truly cared about the youth, he would’ve tried stopping Socrates beforeClaims Socrates was an atheist

Socrates says Oracle’s mission was God’s command

The Vote

• 31 vote margin makes Socrates guilty• Over 500 jurors• Accusers recommend death penaltySocrates recommends no punishment, full room and board at a luxurious job

“Concedes” to 1 mina fine, then eventually 30 mina

Condemned to death after his recommendation by an over 100 vote margin

Philosophy of Religion

• Study of the nature of religion• Many types of Religion• Does God Exist?Monotheistic God of Islam, Judaism, Christianity• How is belief in God justifiedAppeal to faith

Belief independent of evidence and thought

Theology

• Study of God and attributes in relation to the world

• Natural TheologyCan be established by reason• Revealed TheologyRevelation• Theists, Agnostics, Atheists

Definition of God

• A person with divine attributesNot necessarily a humanPerson

Basic concept in ethicsResponsibilities, rights, free willA rational, autonomous, moralistic being

• A perfect personInfallibleDivine Attributes

Omniscient, omnipotent, immutable, omnitemporal, omnibenevolent

Problem of Evil• How can evil exist with an all good God• ArgumentsNothing can be intrinsically evil

Done for greater goodDoesn’t allow arguments to the contraryCircular Definition

• Appeal to free willGod doesn’t cause evilComes from people, who are autonomousAre natural disasters evil?

Evil can only arise through choiceIs eternal damnation evilIf God is omniscient, how can we have free will

God knows but doesn’t intervene?

Arguments for God

• Called Proofs• A posteriori ProofsProofs known through experience only• A priori ProofsIsn’t justified though experience

Cosmological Arguments

• A posteriori proof• Prove God’s existence using commonly known

facts of the universe• St. Thomas AquinasThe Five Ways

Second way; Argument from Efficient Cause to First Cause

Argument from Efficient Cause to First Cause

• Cosmological Argument• Things are caused• Things cannot come from themselves• There cannot be an infinite regress of causes• There must be an uncaused first cause• God is the uncaused first cause• Therefore God exists• RefutationInconsistency Fallacy; #2, 5#5 does not show God still exists

Teleological Argument

• A posteriori proof• Argument from end product of nature to

prove intelligent design• William PaleyWatch Argument

Given complexity and purpose, assume creator

Watch Argument• Human artifacts represent intelligent design• Universe resembles artifacts• Therefore universe resembles intelligent design• Universe is complex• Therefore, must be powerful designer• RefutationInductive Argument

Certain degree of probability, doesn’t proveDoesn’t prove God exists todayIndirectly circular (#1)Does purpose follow from design?Is complexity proof of intelligent designDavid Hume

Strength of inductive argument is dependent on its relevance; most things don’t have a strong relevance

Ontological Argument

• A priori proof• God’s existence follows from the idea of God• St. AnselmScholasticism

What was taught concerning universals based on St. Thomas Aquinas

Faith and reasoning, etc…Is life a trait?

We don’t use it as such

Anselm’s Argument• God is something which nothing greater be conceived • Nonbeliever knows what God isThey understand something which nothing greater be conceived • If it existed in the mind alone it wouldn’t be something from which nothing greater

can be conceived, because existence in reality is greater than existence in the mind• Therefore, God exists by virtue of his definition• RefutationReductio ad absurdum

Deduce contradiction from opposite of what must be true; e.g. rocks must have weight otherwise they’d floatImmanuel Kant

The idea alone is different than actually having itGuanillo

Same logic can be applied to an island; so there must be a hidden island

Brain In A Vat

• If our brain was removed and placed in a vat where it was controlled, and we experienced life as if we had a body, did it happen?

• How do we know if this is all real• Can we rely on our senses? • Epistemological and Metaphysical conundrum • Rene Descartes laid foundation for this• Objectivity vs. Subjectivity; which is more

reliable

Epistemology

• Anybody can believe something; knowledge, however, is something special

The philosophical study of knowledge is Epistemology• Two types of knowledgePerformative Knowledge

How to; I know how to _____Propositional Knowledge

That; I know that_____

Propositional Knowledge• A Priori KnowledgeCan be justified by reason aloneE.g. 2 is greater than 1• A Posteriori KnowledgeCan be justified by experience alone• S(omeone) Knows that P(ropositional Knowledge)Way to remember Propositional Knowledge

E.g. I know that I am human• Three conditions for Propositional KnowledgeS has to believe PS has to be justified in that beliefP must be true

The Truth Condition

• Truth must be consistentPeople used to “know” that the earth was flat

In retrospect, they didn’t know that, they just believed that• Truth is a property• Subjectivist Theory of TruthEveryone has their own truth• Relativist Theory of TruthTruth varies by the beliefs of the time• Objectivist Theory of TruthTruth is objective and a property; either it’s true or it’s not

The Truth Condition• Bertrand RussellStated that truth can only be applied to beliefs and statementsRequirements for a Theory of Truth

Allows FalsehoodTruth can be a property of beliefsWholly dependent on connection to outside world

• Coherence TheoryBelief is true when it coheres with our other beliefsThere can be more than one true set of beliefsRebuttal

Presupposes Law of NoncontradictionJust because it coheres with our other beliefs doesn’t mean it’s true

The Truth Condition

• Correspondence TheoryOur beliefs must correspond with the world and factsPeople believe facts are dubious entries; truth is a necessary condition for knowledge

We must look outside our beliefs to know something

Epistemological Theories• Modern Period begins with Rene DescartesPeriod rises from skepticism• RationalismReason is a fundamental means of acquiring knowledge

Requires certainties for knowledgeInnate Knowledge

Based on mathematical thinking, deduction• EmpiricismExperience is a fundamental means of gaining knowledge

No innate knowledgeTabla Rosa; blank slate

Based on Scientific thinking

Rene Descartes

• Renaissance Man• Wrote The MeditationsSix in allFirst Meditation is on doubt

Attacks the sensesClaim they deceive him, and that it is

not prudent to follow wholly that which has previously deceived us

Meditation 1

• Descartes determines all of his prior beliefs are wrong, and is in search for a new foundation for knowledge

Wants to discover one thing that is impossible to doubtCan deduce other things from this which are

indubitable• Cartesian DoubtTo doubt all belief to find something impossible to doubt• Senses cannot be indubitable, according to DescartesApplies reason only

Meditation 2

• Discovers something impossible to doubtI think, therefore I am

Foundation for Descartes philosophyEven if he were deceived by some malevolent being,

something must exist to be deceivedDoesn’t know who he is or what he is, but knows

that he isHe deduces that he is a thing that thinks

• Foundation for DualismBelieves in two different substances, corporal (body) and mind (Immaterial)

John Locke

• Empiricist, Academic, Government Official• Major work was An Essay Concerning Human

Understanding• Hugely influential on colonies in America

An Essay…• Systematically identifies the origin of human knowledge• We need ideasGives us knowledgeHow do we obtain ideas?• Believes we should not try to question things to certainty because you cannot know

everything• Principle of IdentityThings are themselves• Shuns the idea of innate knowledgeJust because everyone believes something doesn’t mean it’s innateCannot find one belief that is commonly held by everyone• What is an IdeaWhatever the mind perceives in itselfBasic Building Blocks of Knowledge

SensationReflection; when the mind considers itself

An Essay…

• How are simple ideas produced (Colors, Sounds, etc…)We don’t obtain them prior to experienceObtain through qualities in bodies

Primary Qualities-In the things themselvesShape, etc…

Secondary Qualities-Sensible QualitiesFeel, taste, etc…

Tertiary Qualities-Qualities that change primary qualitiesMelting, etc…

• Nothing can exist without ideasWords, actions, etc…

An Essay…• Intuitive KnowledgeMust perceive two different ideas without any outside influenceHighest, most sure knowledge• Demonstrative KnowledgeMind employs intermediary ideasLess certainE.g. Humans are mortal, Socrates was human, therefore Socrates was mortal• Sensitive KnowledgeMind perceives external objectsMost limited type of knowledgeComes from senses

Philosophy of Mind

• Personal Identity• Fundamental Questions about the mind• What is a personAn autonomous, rational, moral agent

Has rights, responsibilitiesWhat makes a person the same person over time

The soul? The brain? Traits?Sameness is more powerful than similarity

What Makes a Person a Person

• A person is a bearer of rights and responsibilities

• Needs to be rational• Needs to be autonomous• Needs to be a moral agentCapable of Inflicting Harm• A person doesn’t have to be a human being• A human being isn’t always a person

Does a Soul Make a Person the Same Person Over Time?

• As long as the soul exists, we exist, hypotheticallySoul exists post mortem• Sameness of Soul CriterionAs long as you have the same soul, you will be the same person• Criteria for a SoulA soul must be immaterial

Doesn’t abide by the laws of mechanicsEverlastingCannot be quantifiedIs not the body

Cartesian Dualism• There are two things that make a human beingThe mind (Immaterial) and corporal substance (Material)• Consistent with most theories of human life (Like religion)Something about beliefs is immaterial and unexplainableSomething like vision requires an awareness of what exists• Metaphysical ViewSecond Meditation; I think therefore I am

What am I?Not primarily a corporal substanceThe essence of the body is extensionOccupies space, can be perceived, quantifiableIf you melt wax is it still the same wax?Descartes believes it isYou don’t get awareness from a body

Cartesian Dualism• Descartes believes we are primarily thinking substancesA thing that thinks, feels, and arguesA mind, a soulProperties

ImmaterialEssence of minds is thoughtMakes us who we are

• Machines and animals can’t think because it is the soul that thinksAnimals are automatons, machines with soft tissue• Absolute separation of the mind from the bodyDescartes’ Analogy

We are the pilot of a ship that we are strongly linked to

Cartesian Dualism• Problems with DualismUsing doubt for property divergence

I cannot doubt I have a mind, I can doubt I have a body, therefore Body and Mind aren’t the same thingMind/Body Problem (The Problem of Causation)

How can the mind affect the body and visa-versa so intimately if they are different

Drinking alcohol can impair the mind, even though it is physicalWhere is the locus of interaction

Descartes believes the pineal glandThe “Third Eye,” likely controls sleep cycle and dreaming

Monism• Belief that only one type of substance makes everything up• Subjective IdealismEverything made has the qualities of mind; all we have is ideas of thingsNothing is corporal• PantheismEverything that exists is part of God• MaterialismDenies the existence of thinking substance

Refined version is PhysicalismEverything can be reduced to something studied by

Science, such as energy, etc…

Identity Theory• A form of Physicalism • Reductionist ViewAll mental states are identical/reducible to physical states

E.g. pain IS the firing of C-Fibers• Token IdentityTokens are a particular event States are identical, but not directly

Everyone experiences a token differently; if they experienced it the same way, they’d be the same person• Type IdentityTypes are a a broad categorization of tokens (E.g. pain can be anything from being punched to falling down)All pain produces the same stateAll mental types are physical types; reduces everything to physics• Token vs Type in linguistics; saying “Flower flower flower flower” has one type of word, four

tokens (individual instances) of the word

Identity Theory

• RefutationHilary Putnam says it is too narrow-minded

If an alien with a completely different chemical makeup feels pain, how would it feel pain if it has a different brain?

Putnam states when thinking of something like pain, we should think more of the psychological state than the physical state

The output is what matters, not the inputEventually leads to Multiple Realizability and Funtionalism

Gilbert Ryle• Wrote The Concept of MindAttacks Cartesian Dualism

“The Ghost in the Machine”Mind and body are polar opposites, every being is both, mind

is the pilot of the ship• Believes Descartes commits a category mistakeFallacy when you confuse something that’s part of one logical category and put it into another category

E.g. going to a university, looking at the individual buildings, then asking where the university isStates Descartes applies physical words to something unobservable

Sameness of Body Criterion

• We are the same person over time because of our body

• Brain is part of the bodyTherefore, as long as we have the same brain, we have the same person

Embodiment of Self

• Body identifies the personAs long as you have the same body, you will be the same self• David HumeBelieves there is no constant immutable belief

Denies the idea of a selfThe closest thing to a self is a stream of ideas

“The self is nothing but a bundle or collection of different perceptions which succeed each other with inconceivable rapidity and are in perpetual flux”

We are constantly improving and changing

Phineas Gage

• Foreman in railway construction companyMany positive qualities, efficient, hardworking, etc…Had an accident where a pole destroyed part of his brain, but survived retaining all of his memories

After accident, many of his traits changed, so much so that he was called “No Longer Gage”

Indifferent, capricious, irreverent, etc…

Transorbital Lobotomies

• Dr. Egas MonizPortuguese Doctor who invented the lobotomy• Dr. Walter FreedmanInvented Icepick Lobotomies in U.S.

Used hammers to drive an icepick into someone’s brain through their eyelids

Performed all over the U.S.• In a Transorbital Lobotomy, a part of the frontal lobe is

destroyed to make people behave in socially acceptable ways

Really made them zombies

Continuity of Memories Criterion• Are we the person we are because of memories• Need some or most memories to be the person• John LockeWhat makes a person a person?

Thinking being, consciousness separate from thinking, awareness of who we are, sameness of rational being• Under this, we can be multiple people in the same lifeGallant Officer ObjectionIf A=B and B=C then C=A; identity should be transitiveSomeone steals an apple at five years old

50 years later, he wins the medal of honor, but still remembers the apple20 years later, he remembers winning the medal of honor, but forgets

the appleIn this case, A=B and B=C but A=/=C

Psychological Continuity Criterion

• We are the same person because our bundle of traits, desires, beliefs, qualities, etc…

• ConditionsA=B if A is psychologically continuous with B, and A isn’t psychologically continuous with anyone else• What if we were cloned, and our real body diedWould our clone still be us?What if we survived, and the clone and individual went their separate ways

If they met again 20 years later, would they be the same person?

Nature of the Mind

• Can something nonhuman have a mind?• Mind/Body Problem • How do we know something has a mind?• Cognitive SciencesStudy of the Mind and IntenlligenceIntelligence System

Something that can potentially be intelligent

Bertrand Russell

• Analogy ArgumentWe look within ourselves and know what causes us to behave how we do

When we see others behaving similarly to us, we put our reasoning behind them• We assume higher intelligence has the same experiences as

usE.g. Tigers feel pleasure, dogs feel pain, etc…• Machines don’t think, but have the ability to do things that

require thought for usRussell says that machines are missing purpose

Functionalism• What are functions?Two senses

Purpose of a thingEquivalencies

y=2x and 2y=4x are different functions, but with the same purpose and are equivalent• Functional Description vs. Physical DescriptionWhat is purpose vs. the architecture of it

An example would be is an artificial heart a legitimate heart, because even though it is made differently, it serves the same purpose?• Anything that satisfies a function is a computerIn the mind of a functionalist, our minds are computers• Is Cognition computation?If so, there is nothing biological about thinking

Functionalism

• Theory of Mind• Mental States are explained in purely functional waysDefined by input/outputsFollow a rule to go from one thing to another• Gives rise to computer metaphorMind is to man what software is to computer• Multiple RealizabilityMultiple different types of architecture can realize the same function• Functions are inherently equivalent• Nothing biological about the mind

Functionalism

• Simulation vs. EmulationAre they equal• Can a Machine think?• LearningChange in behavior that rises from experienceDo machines Learn and evolve?• Machines must follow rules. Machines must

be rational and are incapable of irrationality

Alan Turing

• Founding father of computer sciences• Enigma ProjectDecoded German Cyphers• Created the Turing Test

The Imitation Game

• Three ParticipantsMale, Female, and Interrogator

Interrogator must determine which is which

All are in different rooms and communicate in writingEither the male or the female must imitate what the other would say stereotypically

Turing Test

• Same concept as imitation game, but rather than a male and a female, it is played between a machine and a human

Interrogator must determine which is the machine

Machine tries to be human• Tests whether or not a machine is intelligentIs fluency in language equivalent to intelligence?

What is a Machine

• Three partsMemoryCentral Processing Unit (CPU); carries out ordersControl; Order is obeyed• All digital computers are equal in the same

sense all humans are equalAll computers can implement any algorithm

Turing’s Prediction

• By 2000, machines will be indistinguishable from humans and there will be a gigabyte of storage in machines

We aren’t close to making machines indistinguishable from humans1 gb is next to nothing today

John Searle• American Philosopher and Teacher at Berkley• Chinese Thought Experiment While Searle believes in weak AI, he doesn’t believe in Strong AI; AI with a mindIf given instructions on how to transcribe Chinese letters, after ten years of practice, will he know Chinese?

He can do it, but won’t understand it• CognitivismTake the analogy “Mind is to Human what software is to machine” literally• Searle believes the key to the mind is understandingProducing the right behavior is not equal to knowing the right behavior• ConclusionsAs long as programs are defined as operations, they cannot comprehendHas Syntax but no Semantics

John Searle

• Robot ReplyIf a computer is in a robot, and it did something similar to perceive its environment rather than perform operations, can it think?If equipped with video camera and storage, and it sees a pig, can it understand the pig it sees?• Searle believes that a machine can simulate a

human, but cannot emulate a humanWith no meaning, it won’t do anything but produce sequences

John Searle

• ReductionismBelief we can reduce higher level stuff to lower level stuff

Mental states reduce to physical states• Consciousness is defined by Searle as the subjective character

of experienceProblem is we only have access to our own minds

We cannot understand what others perceiveBelieves we cannot explain consciousness through biology

E.g. Bats have echolocationWe understand how it works, but we don’t

understand what it’s like to have

Ethics

• Study of morally permissible, impermissible, and obligatory

What we should do, shouldn’t do, and must do• Normative disciplineHow it ought to be rather than how it is• Ethical issuesGay rights, abortion, etc…

Always at least one big ethical issue in the media

Anatomy of Moral Theories• Ethics is concerned with enabling us to know what we ought to do• Moral PrincipleMoral ruleArticulates what makes it moral• Rational PrincipleWhat we can follow to make sure we follow the moral principle• Moral Objectivist TheoriesSome actions are always permissible, impermissible, obligatory

No exceptions• Moral Nonobjectivist TheoriesNo actions are black and whiteCase-by-case basis

Moral Objectivist Theories

• Divine Command TheoryGod delivers moralsActions must accord with God’s will• Virtue Based EthicsA thing is right depending on the virtueWe must used reason to find the virtuous thing to do

Aristotle defines it as “The mean between the extremes”• Duty Based EthicsAn action is only moral if it coincides with our duty

Moral Nonobjectivist Theories• Moral SubjectivismRelativism

An action is right only if the person decides it isVaries person to person

Moral RelativismMorals determined by society

Varies society to society• Moral NihilismThere is no standard, everything is permissible• ConsequentialismA thing is right only if the consequences are good

End justifies the meansMoral Egoism

We do that which makes us happiestUtilitarianism

We do that which makes society the best

Relativism

• Cultural RelativismSome things are permissible in some cultures, impermissible in othersObjective factHas nothing to do with moralityE.g. slavery was permissible in the antebellum south, eating certain foods is impermissible in some societies• Moral RelativismHow it ought to be

E.g. is female circumcision moral?

Ruth Benedict

• Draws distinction between abnormal and normal behavior

Should abide by normal behavior in a societyAbnormal behavior falls outside of cultural norms

How much is influenced by our cultureIs it biological?

• Concludes normality is culturally definedMost individuals are plastics who are molded by our society• Is there something more to a society than societal

norms?

James Rachels• Claims the plasticity of society doesn’t determine morality• Cultural Differences ArgumentPeople claim there is no objective morality due to cultural relativism

Rachels claims that this idea is not cogent and is unsoundSome societies believed in a geocentric view, others in a heliocentric view;

does this mean that there was no objective truth regarding the matter because there are disagreements?

Moral relativists cannot defend that genocide is objectively wrongReformers always advocate something immoral under this

• Customs are not equal to values• Universal Values according to RachelsProtecting infantsTruth TellingValuing of Life

No murder

Egoism

• Ayn Rand’s PhilosophyObjectivism, perception is reliable, we can obtain knowledge through senses, etc…Criticism is that the pursuit of happiness of ones own selfish desires is advocated

Predicated on unabashed selfishness• There is both a descriptive and normative

dimension of egoism

Psychological Egoism

• Descriptive dimension of Egoism• Empirical view of why people act how they do People act selfishly• Is it true?Problem is we can spin anything to be selfish

E.g. if someone jumps on a hand grenade to save his comrades, we can say he did it out of a desire to obtain honor

Moral Egoism

• Normative dimension of Egoism• Individual Moral EgoismPeople must do what they do in order to make x happy

X can be a family member, a friend, etc…Example would be the friend who has to control everything

Everything centers around himGo to his movie, eat his food, play his game, etc…

• Universal Moral EgoismPeople ought to do that which maximizes his/her own interest/pleasure

Plato’s Origin of Justice

• From the RepublicGlaucon and Socrates (Voice of Plato) are the main characters

“The mean and compromise to do that which is the best of all (To do injustice and not be punished) and the worst of all (To suffer injustice without retaliation); justice, the middle, is tolerated”

Defends using the Story of Gyges

The Story of Gyges

• A warrior in a Greek City-StateDiscovers a ring that makes him invisible• Behavior personifies moral egoismCan do whatever he wants without punishment i.e. the best life• Conspires against king and kills him• Plato says no one would be able to resist this

temptation

Hobbes’ Origin of Justice• From The LeviathanAll men are equal at the core

All men think of themselves as wiseDelude themselves on the extent of their knowledge

In nature, humans do that which make them happyEvery man for himself, no standard for right and wrong

“When there is no rule, there is no low; when there is no law, there is no justice”In order to achieve civility, two things are needed

Social ContractUnrestrained freedom in the state of nature must be constrained by laws

and mutual covenantsStrong AuthorityTo prevent violation of social contract

Lewis Pojman• Personal/Psychological EgoismSelfish by choice; descriptive view• Individual Moral EgoismPerson who expects everyone to conform to his happiness• Universal Moral EgoismWhat makes me happy• Attempted refutations of EgoismPublicity Argument

Self-defeating for the egoist to push an egotistical philosophical theoryIf everyone is an egoism, my individual happiness will suffer

However, says an egoism can privately support egoism, but publicly condemn itSolipsistic Argument

Egoism assumes I and only I existParadox of Egoism

In order to reap the benefits of egoism, one must give up egoism and become altruistic

Richard Dawkins• Socio-BiologistDraws parallels from nature to human behavior• “Morality is a successful strategy for gene replication”Only occurs in society• Uses Bird Colony ExampleSuckers (Altruistic)

Will groom any bird that presents itself for groomingCheaters (Egoists)

Bird that will present itself for grooming, but won’t groomGrudges (Reciprocal Altruists)

Will only groom a bird that grooms it firstIn colonies of suckers, everyone thrivesIn colonies of cheaters, everyone losesIn a mix, cheaters rely on the suckersDetermines selfishness is not good for society

Aristotle

• Tutored Alexander the Great• Believed in a hierarchy of knowledge^ Metaphysics (Most contemplative)v Ethics (Most practical)• Unlike Plato and Socrates, had no disdain for empiricism• Wrote The Nichomachean EthicsWhat is our aim?

HappinessWhat is Happiness?Masses “Do not give the same account as the wise”

Aristotle’s Definition of Happiness• Life of Pleasure (Happiness=Pleasure)Masses mostly subscribe to this (The “uneducated and vulgar”)Seek momentary, fleeting pleasures as happinessThe sensual life• The Political Life (Honor/Status=Happiness)Pursuit of honor and wealthUpper classes• The Moral Life (Knowledge=Pleasure)The “Chief Good”Contemplative Life

Knowledge and virtueHappiness is an end, not a means to an end

Result of a compilation of activity of the soul and a complete lifeHappiness is not fleeting

How to Achieve Aristotle’s Happiness

• We use reason to learn what we ought to do• External ThingsNeed a moderate amount of material objectsRequired for happiness• ActionMust practice a passionMust know actions are virtuous

Right thing for the right reasonDeliberately choose to do the right thing for its own sake“By performing brave acts we become brave”

• Use of Reason• Virtue

Virtue

• Intellectual VirtueAttained through learning/teaching• Moral VirtueAttained by doing virtuous thingsWhat you ought to do is the mean between the extremesSome actions have no mean

Murder, adultery, etc… are always wrongSome do have a mean

We use reason to find the meanFear Courage(Virtue) Overconfidence

Immanuel Kant

• Critique of Pure ReasonEpistemology• Kant’s EthicsDeontelogical Ethics

Based on Duty

Duty Based Ethics• What are dutiesThings we ought to do, but don’t have to do

“You don’t get an ought from an is or an is from an ought”Ought to eat right, but not everyone doesThere is slavery, but isn’t right

• Consequences are irrelevantThe wrong thing for the right reasons are moral• How to determine our dutiesCan’t defer to authority or religionUse reason as a rational agent• Categorical ImperativeRule to discover our dutiesAct on an action if, hypothetically, it would be a good universal law

Must allow everyone to do itEveryone should be obligated to do it

• Duties must be autonomous, and there are no exceptions

Duty Based Ethics

• Hypothetical ImperativeActions you perform for the sake of something elseNot moral or immoral, since it’s for an end

E.g. studying for a test, which is a means to the end of the duty of fulfilling one’s own potential• ProblemsIgnores consequencesDuties vary person to personAbsolutely binding

John Stuart Mill

• Conventionalist (Nothing is ever true)• Did not invent utilitarianism, just pushed itHis essay, Utilitarianism, gives a concise definition of utilitarianism

Utilitarianism• Greatest Happiness PrincipleWhat is moral is what causes the greatest amount of happiness• What is Utilitarian Happiness?Maximizing pleasure while minimizing pain• Consequentialism Weight consequences and choose best option• Commonly attributed to the sensual lifeMill states this is a misconception• Definition of Greatest Happiness PrincipleNot happiness for the agent, but greatest happiness altogether

Individuals happiness is irrelevantSome pleasures are greater than others

“Better to be a human dissatisfied than a pig satisfied”Uses Aristotle’s hierarchy

Sensual pleasures are lowest, knowledge is greatest

Utilitarianism• Act UtilitarianismMill’s UtilitarianismWeigh each cost individually

Consequences of A vs. B, do that which maximizes happinessIssues is that it is very time-consuming

What if the time for action passes while contemplatingIs the Greatest Happiness simply a majority?

E.g. if 51% of people are against Gay Marriage, does that mean it should be illegal?

What if the majority is wrong?• Rule UtilitarianismAct on rule of that which maximizes greatest happiness

Create conceptions of rules ahead of time• Issue with utilitarianism is that it is argumentum ad populum