Philosophical Foundations Information: (RH: ) but material also on UGLA.

Jacques-Louis David, Dauði Sókratesar, Socrates drinks the poison

Socrates The exemplary philosopher for many. Arguments (truth) vs rhetoric (conviction). The pretence of knowing. First step: “I know” Second step: Coversation with someone who is wiser. Third step: I don’t know. Fourth step: The search for wisdom begins.

Critical thinking Páll Skúlason’s definition Critical thinking is the kind of thinking that never adopts an opinion/accepts or endorses a belief unless it has studied the content of the belief or opinion and found sufficient evidence for it. (Páll Skúlason, 1987, p. 70).

Boðorð gagnrýninnar hugsunar “… it is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence (Clifford, 1877).

Clifford The sources of belief (did you acquire it by honest investigation?) Real belief affects action. No beliefs are a private matter.

Methods of fixing a belief Method of tenacity Method of authority A priori method The method of science (sbr. Charles Peirce, 1877)

What is the hallmark of good arguments? They engage the issue or the argument. Objective They can be tested in the real world or in logical space. Formal understanding of arguments: Premises and conclusion. The conclusion follows from the premises.

Williams James Our passional nature not only lawfully may, but must, decide an option between propositions, whenever it is a genuine option that cannot by its nature be decided on intellectual grounds; for to say, under such circumstances, “Do not decide, but leave the question open,” is itself a passional decision,— just like deciding yes or no,—and is attended with the same risk of losing the truth. (James, 1897)

James on Clifford Clifford exagerates. Clifford does not observe the difference between our volitional/emotional side and our cognitive side. Is Clifford a moralist?