Philosophy Sept. 14th Objective Opener Understand the value and purpose of Thought Experiments by participating in discussions and taking notes What was the biggest ocean in the world before Balboa discovered the Pacific Ocean? How many cookies could you eat on an empty stomach? Three mature and hefty women were walking in San Francisco under one regular-size umbrella. Why didn’t they get wet? What can a pitcher be filled with so it is lighter than when it is full of air?

Section 1.3 The Laboratory of the Mind Thought Experiments © 2013 McGraw-Hill Companies. All Rights Reserved. McGraw-Hill

Philosophical Theories and Thought Experiments Philosophical theories explain how it’s possible (or why it’s impossible) for a concept to apply by identifying the conditions for applying it. Thought experiments test such theories by determining whether the conditions identified are necessary or sufficient. *remember The necessary condition is the weaker condition. It’s like a prerequisite or one of the ingredients.  The sufficient condition is the stronger of the two conditions. It entails the necessary condition. A Word About Conditional Statements: In a properly formulated conditional statement, the antecedent is the sufficient condition and the consequent is the necessary condition. For example, (If p then q). P is the sufficient condition while q is the necessary condition.

Thought Experiment A thought experiment describes a possible situation in which a concept should apply or a condition should be met if the theory in question is true.

Test Implication A conditional or if-then statement indicating what should be the case if the theory is true. If I did my homework, then I will get an A.

Counterexample An example that runs counter to or conflicts with a theory. For example, suppose that someone claimed that all crows are black. A non-black crow, then, would be a counterexample to that claim. *suppose you did the homework wrong or incomplete? Or turned it in late? How would you revise your statement?

Aristotle’s Human Being Human beings are rational animals. Test implication: If all and only human beings are rational animals, then infants are rational animals, because infants are human beings. Counterexample: Human infants are human beings, but they are not rational.

Aristotle’s Human Being (revised) Revised theory: All human beings are animals that have the capacity to be rational. Thought experiment: Can you conceive of a human being that does not have the capacity to be rational or of a non-human animal that has the capacity to be rational?

Aristotle’s Human Being (revised) The argument against Aristotle goes like this: (1) If human beings are rational animals, then human infants must be rational animals. (2) But human infants aren’t rational animals. (3) Therefore it’s not necessarily true that human beings are rational animals. The form of this argument is denying the consequent.

Thought Probe: Platonic Humans Plato once claimed that human beings are featherless bipeds (creatures that walk on two legs). Can you conceive of a featherless biped that is not a human being or a human being that is not a featherless biped?

Persons Persons are beings with full moral rights, including the right to life. What makes something a person? Why do normal adult humans have full moral rights but not cows, pigs, and chickens?

Thought Experiment: Warren’s Moral Space Traveler “Imagine a space traveler who lands on an unknown planet and encounters a race of beings utterly unlike he has ever seen or heard of. If he wants to be sure of behaving morally toward these beings, he has to somehow decide whether they are people, and hence have full moral rights….” What should he look for?

Warren’s Criteria for Personhood Consciousness Reasoning (the developed capacity to solve new problems) Self-motivated activity The capacity to communicate messages of an indefinite variety of types Self-consciousness

Thought Probe: Robot Rights The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Robots believes that it is causally possible for robots to possess Warren’s criteria for personhood. Is it causally possible? Remember: Something is causally impossible if and only if it violates a law of nature. If they possessed those criteria, should they be given the same rights as human persons?

Coherent Imaginability and Time Travel A situation is coherently imaginable when its details can be filled in and its implications drawn out without running into a contradiction. Time travel is not coherently imaginable because it implies that statements about the past can be both true and false, and that’s logically impossible.

Conceivability and Possibility The best evidence that a situation is possible is that it’s conceivable (coherently imaginable). But from the fact that something seems conceivable, it doesn’t necessarily follow that it is actually conceivable, for it may imply a contradiction that we have not yet uncovered.

Thought Experiment: Tooley’s Cat Do potential persons have the same rights as actual persons? Suppose a cat was accidentally given an injection that would cause its brain to develop into one with the same capabilities as ours. Would it be wrong to kill the cat before the brain was fully developed?

Thought Experiment: Thomson’s Diseased Musician Do persons have the right to use your body against your will? Suppose that a musician with a fatal kidney ailment had his bloodstream attached to yours because you are the only person with the right blood type. If you allow him to stay plugged in for nine months, he will lead a normal life. Are you morally obligated to stay plugged in?

Homework: Philosophical Chairs Prep Be sure you have completed the Internet Inquiry regarding Euthanasia. Reflect on the class discussion regarding the question “What is a Person”. Decide whether you are Pro or Con Euthanasia or Physician-Assisted Suicide OR if you need more information.

Logic Games!!