Introduction to Philosophy

1. Introduction to Philosophy Lecture 1: Socrates Euthyphro and Theaetetus Audience, Author, and Method

2. Socrates • ~470 – 399 BCE • Athens, Greece • “The sense of wonder is the mark of a philosopher” • “The unexamined life is not worth living” • “I am the gadfly which the god had given the state and all day long and in all places am always fastened upon you, arousing and persuading and reproaching you.” • “One thing only I know… and that is that I know nothing.”

3. The Socratic Method Induction: the process of deriving general principles from particular facts or instances Universal Definition: determining the source or grounds that makes our concepts and ideas meaningful. (E.g., “what makes something holy?”) Continually questioning ones assumptions Dialogue as a method of learning/education

4. Constructive Responses • Preparation: when we consider questions ahead of time we will have the ability to process tough questions at a higher level without feeling ignorant or embarrassed. • Humility: When we acknowledge the (universal) truth that we don’t quite know (or haven’t yet considered) one thing or another it allows us to effectively pursue truth instead of fight for victory. • Respect the Truth: Assuming that our beliefs about things at any given moment might either be (a) false or (b) not quite the fullness of truth allows us the respect that God’s truth deserves It also demands us to avoid “straw-man” arguments that do not actually benefit anybody. “An honest search for truth compels us to entertain the option that our opponents might know something we don’t. If we we are unwilling to take an adversary’s best shot, we lack integrity” (Wilkens, 34).

5. Influence • Almost universal influence via Plato • Hard to distinguish historical from literary • Lays out basic assumptions of philosophy • Personification of philosophy (as skill and lifestyle) • It is the figure of Socrates that perseveres more than any particular quote or theory he held • The “Sage” in ancient Greco-Roman culture.

6. Socrates and Jesus • The Gospel of Luke, being written to a primarily Gentile (e.g., Greek) audience, makes particular efforts to draw out the similarities between Jesus and Socrates. • Especially pertaining to their trials and executions. • Both express an “emotionless” or calm attitude in the face of death • A sense of divine-appointed destiny (Lk 22:42) • Belief in immortality (Acts 2:23-24) • Innocence of charges (Lk 15:47) • Brought up on Same Charges (Lk 23:2) • Subverting the nation • Atheism (introducing new gods) • Challenging political powers

7. Practice “Celibacy, fasting, penance, mortification, self-denial, humility, silence, solitude, and whole train of monkish virtues;--for what reason are they everywhere rejected by men of sense, but because they serve to no manner of purpose; neither advance a man’s fortune in the world, nor the entertainment of company, nor increase his power of self-enjoyment? We observe, on the contrary, that they cross all these desirable ends; stupefy the understanding and harden the heart, obscure the fancy and sour the temper… a Gloomy, hair-brained enthusiast, after his death, may have a place in the Calendar; but will scarcely ever be admitted, when alive, into intimacy and society, except by those who are as delirious and dismal as himself.” --David Hume, Enquiry into Morals (1751)

8. Euthyphro

9. Retracing the Argument Euthyphro wants to prosecute his father for the murder of one his father’s slaves out of duty to the gods (holiness // piety) Define holiness…

10. First Defintion “The holy is what I am now doing…” This is an example, not a definition. Looking for what makes something holy, the source of holiness that makes it intelligible when we talk about something being holy.

11. Second Definition • “What is pleasing to the gods is holy and what is not pleasing to them is unholy” • But there are many gods who disagree sometimes • Sharpened to “what all gods love…” • Essential Question: Is what is holy holy because the gods approve it, or do they approve it because it is holy?

12. Implications • If the gods love it because it is holy… • Then holiness is something that is “above” the gods; or has power over the gods. • If it is holy because the gods love it… • Then what is holy (or good) is arbitrary: “might makes right” • The gods could decide that it is holy to wear hairnets or unholy to wear the color blue.

13. Third Definition An act is holy because it is pleasing to the gods… Objection: that only tells us about the gods, it does not tell us why they love it. Therefore: if there is a reason why the holiness pleases the gods then this definition cannot be true.

14. Summary http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IgGB4Oxs5VU

15. Processing Euthyphro What was the occasion of this question? How might this questioning effect Euthyphro’s actions? Does the good come from God or is it independent of God? What about Craig’s “false dilemma” approach?

16. Theaetetus On the occasion of Theaetetus’ possible death some conversants recall a conversation between Theaetetus and Socrates. Example: mathematical facts or the knowledge of a skill Example is not a definition

17. Brief Summary, Part 1 • Knowledge is (a judgment about) perception • Perception is subjective, we cannot all be right about what we perceive • We are all in our own world, perceiving the same object in question in different ways (Dark Room Elephant Problem) • Problems: • Why is the judgment of humans privileged? • Why is the judgment of the teacher (wise man) privileged? • It is possible to perceive without knowing (e.g., foreign language) • It is possible to know without perceiving (e.g., closing eyes)

18. Brief Summary, Part 2 • Because we are all in our own subjective worlds, the way we resolve the question of truth is by asking what works. • But why should I need someone else’s help to navigate my own world? • Doesn’t the existence of other subjective realities imply a common source of reality? • Some things cannot be perceived by senses: • What is good/valuable? • Does God exist and what are his attributes?

19. Processing Theaetetus How might the question of knowledge be relevant to imminent death? What is the difference between mathematical knowledge and the knowledge in skills? How do we access knowledge of philosophical questions? The relationship between scientific rationality/method and philosophy/theology.

20. Philosophical Writing

21. Audience • “The student’s goal is to show the professor that she knows some philosophical doctrine by giving an accurate rendering of it; further the student must show that she knows, not simply what propositions have been espoused by certain philosophers, but why they hold them.” (Martinich, 10) • The point of these papers is: • To help you process ideas • To help you develop the skills of critical thinking • To prove to me that you’ve accomplished both of the above • The point of these papers is not: • To impress me with how deep or intelligent you are • To convince me of your point of view • To edify me spiritually

22. The Ignorant Professor • “The student needs to assume that the audience is (a) intelligent but (b) uninformed.” (Martinich, 10) • The professor should be considered ignorant in the sense that you: • Cannot assume he understands your technical terms • Is not up to date on the contours of the philosophical debate • “knows what you’re trying to say” • The point of assuming the professor is ignorant is to help you develop healthy philosophical style: • Clear, accessible writing is the mark of mature, developed philosophical skill. • Difficult or technical writing is reserved for (a) immature writing or (b) high-level academic discourse.

23. Author “Your feelings have no claim to universality and do not automatically transfer to your audience. You might feel that God exits but that is no reason why anyone else should… Specific incidents in your life also have no place in your essay, considered as your experiences. Considered simply as experiences, they may have both relevance and force.” (Martinich, 13)

24. The Omnipotent Student • The student (author) is omnipotent and omniscient in the sense that you can determine the contours of your examples and arguments as you please. • The only boundary to this principle is logical coherence. • Absurd examples do not convince. • Arguments have to have some connectivity and sequence.

25. Method • Intuition – Pre-theoretical (unreflected) judgments that a person makes about something. • Murder is wrong • My shoes are brown • Theory – A systematic explanation or description of a large class of phenomena • Gravity • Relativity • Middle Ground • Begin with intuitions and use theory to critically examine them • Begin with a theory and use intuitions to challenge theories • Use whichever you like, just be clear about what you’re doing!