1 / 14

Meditation One

Meditation One. What is the objective of the Meditations?. Hint: look at second sentence of Med. I. How do we know he is after Absolute Knowledge (K*)? How do we get K*? How do we know when we have it?. RD’s Answer: ‘certainty of belief’.

fritzi
Download Presentation

Meditation One

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Meditation One What is the objective of the Meditations? Hint: look at second sentence of Med. I.

  2. How do we know he is after Absolute Knowledge (K*)?How do we get K*? How do we know when we have it? RD’s Answer: ‘certainty of belief’

  3. 1) JP: what is this "certainty"? Confidence? Lots of extreme confidence? 2) Then does certain belief = "verified belief"? Maybe, but what provides verification that overcomes the possibility of error? RD: one way of getting at certainty is to show what abs. knowl. looks like, then say "that's what certainty gets at." The via negativa: first look at what abs. knowl is not. –i) It is not false (truth seems to be a property of known assertions). –ii) It is not what I do not believe. But is true belief knowledge? –iii) No. Is justified true belief knowledge? –iv) No, since my belief that it was 2:51 last Thursday was justified, and true, but we decided it was not K*.

  4. 3) What more do we need in order to convert JTB into knowledge? Well, it must be some additional property of the belief. Call this property X. So K* = JTB + X. 4) How do we discover what "X" is? Well, RD thinks certainty is the mark of K*, and it seems like certainty is just 'indubitability of belief', so perhaps X = 'indubitability of the justified true belief'.

  5. 5) Is this indubitability just the name for a psychological state we fall into when believing some things...an inability to bring ourselves to the psychological attitude of doubting? –No. The inability to doubt must be something arising in the intellect alone. It is not a psychological state, but rather a property of a belief such that it is conceptually beyond doubting, for example. The impossibility of this doubt is rather more like the impossibility of completing the concept of a round square (RD has argument for the claim that any indubitable belief is true)

  6. RD’s Method of Doubt Find some principles which are indubitable, then derive, as in a geometric deduction, the rest of the true beliefs about the world from these. Method of doubt acts as a filter for our dubitable beliefs. Note that RD finds actual geometry dubitable (Meditation #1). RD generates general doubt about our common beliefs with a Three Step sceptical attack that comes in Two Phases

  7. Phase 1 Generate a fully general doubt about all sensory beliefs. (i) ordinary (insecure) sense beliefs—perceptual errors and perceptual illusions (ii) secure sense beliefs—vivid dreams (the dream hypothesis) Does this place all sensory beliefs in doubt? NO. The Dreamer’s Palette remains (what’s that?)

  8. Phase 2 Generate a fully general doubt about all sensory beliefs that remain unchallenged by the dream hypothesis AND a fully general doubt about all mathematical beliefs (iii) beliefs about simple natures/general things (i.e., our dream-immune beliefs about the ‘sensory palette’ and all mathematical / geometrical beliefs—Evil Demon Hypothesis (EDH)

  9. What beliefs remain intact? NONE. Epistemic Vertigo. Maximus scepticus. Cognitive despair sets in.

  10. The Plan of the Meditations 1. Use the method of doubt (EDH) to find a criterion for absolute knowledge (by isolating some belief that cannot be doubted)2. Use that criterion to discover some true beliefs that can be joined in arguments that logically establish conclusions that defeat evil demon skepticism.How to do That:A. prove God exists as the creator of the world and my mind and all its powers. (Med. III)B. prove that God is not a deceiver (is not an Evil Demon that would mislead me in my belief-forming practices) (Med IV)C. prove that all mathematical truths are instances of absolute knowledge. (Med V)D. prove that these truths describe the real nature of any possible world consisting of bodies in space. (Med V)E. prove that there is a world of bodies in space. (Med VI)

  11. Meditation II:The Cogito • as inference: Nec (Ti->Ei). Not: Nec(Ei) • as performance: “I am, I exist.” (Hintikka) (a) Fails because, on EDH, I need an additional premise besides (Ti) to infer (Ei): (Ti->Ei) [where there’s thinking there’s existence of the thing that thinks]) Why? Does (a) imply: Nec (Ti<->Ei)? No! (existence does not imply thinking)

  12. What the Cogito Establishes The truth criterion is derived from the Cogito. How? Ask: what makes the Cogito belief true even on the EDH? Answer: when I clearly grasp why when I try to doubt my existence, something is immediately evident to my mind which shows I cannot fail to exist.

  13. So this is a clue about the nature of Absolute K. The Cogito belief has these properties: • It is clear and distinct • It is self-confirming Proposal: whenever I wonder whether a belief can be known to be true (even on EDH), check to see if it has these two properties. If it does, I can trust it!

  14. Upshot If I can construct arguments to show that: 1) God exists, 2) Created the world, me and my ability to form beliefs, 3) is not a deceiving God, and 4) my beliefs based on sense perception and stepwise reasoning could only be false if 3) were false, then: The EDH is false. Problem solved!

More Related