FOUNDATIONS Flashcards

(33 cards)

1
Q

Philosophical presuppositions

A

Beliefs which provide the foundation for everything one believes, with constitute the real basis for ones attitudes, words, and actions.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Logical Conclusions

A

The results, or outcomes, which will occur as a result of living consistently and coherently with one’s philosophical presuppositions.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Line Of Despair (Thanatos Syndrome)

A

The gulf, chasm, or abyss in terms of one’s philosophy which arises when one’s philosophical presuppositions are reviled to be erroneous, destructive, and deadly

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Absolute Proof

A

Evidence and interpretation of the evidence leaves an absolute zero margin for error. 


How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Conclusive Proof

A

When evidence and interpretation makes it absolutely reasonable to accept a position and unreasonable to reject it. Qualitative vs quantitative arguments.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Empirical Claims

A

Proposed truths concerning physical reality. (5 senses)


How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Analytical Claims

A

Proposed truth concerning words and their meaning.


How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Value Claims

A

Truths concerning what one should be or what one should do
.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Metaphysical Claims

A

(other end of empirical) Truths concerning non-physical, transcendent reality.


How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

-PRINCIPLES OF LOGIC-

INTUITIVE PRINCIPLES:

Law of Identity

A

Everything that exists has a specific nature. Has characteristics that are part of what it is.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

-PRINCIPLES OF LOGIC-

INTUITIVE PRINCIPLES:

Law of Noncontradiction

A

Two propositions, if they contradict each other, cannot both be true.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

-PRINCIPLES OF LOGIC-

INTUITIVE PRINCIPLES:

The Law of the Excluded Middle

A

(Mutually exclusive claims) Either a proposition or its negative is true.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

-PRINCIPLES OF LOGIC-

INTUITIVE PRINCIPLES:

The Law Of Verification

A

A proposition must be willing to face the same criteria that it demands for the claim that it opposes.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

-PRINCIPLES OF LOGIC-

INTUITIVE PRINCIPLES:

The Law of Cogito(ergo sum)

A

Two self evident claims, the counter claims to each are self-contradictory

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

-PRINCIPLES OF LOGIC-

PROBABILISTIC PRINCIPLES:

The Immutability of Math throughout the Universe

A

3 is always 3 and can never be two or four.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

-PRINCIPLES OF LOGIC-

PROBABILISTIC PRINCIPLES:

The Immutability of physical laws throughout the Universe

A

Gravity is always gravity and conformed to gravitational principles.

17
Q

EPISTEMOLOGICAL APPROACHES TO MORAL AND ETHICAL DECISION MAKING:

MAJORITY OPINION

A

The Beliefe that the opinions and actions of the majority of individuals in the group constitute a bases for determining what is true and right.

18
Q

EPISTEMOLOGICAL APPROACHES TO MORAL AND ETHICAL DECISION MAKING:

Genetic Programing & Socialization Processes (Nature/Nurture - Presupposition & Conditioning

A

Genetic Conditioning determines what is true and right. (Its just who I am)


19
Q

EPISTEMOLOGICAL APPROACHES TO MORAL AND ETHICAL DECISION MAKING:

PERSONAL INTUITION (Feeling & Mystical Enlightenment)

A

Personal feeling, inner “knowing,” mystical impressions, and individual intuition are a valid basis for determining what is true and right.

20
Q

EPISTEMOLOGICAL APPROACHES TO MORAL AND ETHICAL DECISION MAKING:

EXTERNAL, OBJECTIVE REVELATION (Metaphysical Encounter)

A

A metaphysical source for knowledge and guidance is preferable as a source for determining what is rue and right.

21
Q

FALLACIES IN INDUCTIVE LOGIC:

APPEAL TO AUTHORITY

A

The attempt to show that a positions should be accepted by drawing attention to the fact that a popular and well-known figure seems to support this position. (relevance issue)


22
Q

FALLACIES IN INDUCTIVE LOGIC:

AD HOMINEM (against the man)

A

Attempt to discredit a position by attacking a person associated with said position. (relevance issue)


23
Q

FALLACIES IN INDUCTIVE LOGIC:

ARGUMENT FROM ANALOGY

A

The attempt to gain support for a position by making and unfair comparisons between two things, the purpose of witch is to give the appearance of a relationship where there is none. (relevance issue)

24
Q

FALLACIES IN INDUCTIVE LOGIC:

ARGUMENT FROM FORCE

A

Attempt is made to gain support from a position and compliance to demands by threatening physical and/or non-physical harm. This approach operated from a “bully” mentality, as though the power to harm someone proves the validity of ones position. (relevance issue)


25
FALLACIES IN INDUCTIVE LOGIC: ARGUMENT FROM IGNORANCE/ARGUMENT FROM SILENCE
Support for a position is based upon the argument that because no opposition is voiced or because one has no information concerning opposition the position must be valid. (quantitative issue)
26
FALLACIES IN INDUCTIVE LOGIC: CIRCULAR ARGUMENT
Circular fallacy is a type of reasoning in which the proposition is supported by the premises, which is supported by the proposition, creating a circle in reasoning where no useful information is being shared. The attempt is made to gain support for a position by providing a support statement that proves nothing because its basic argument is that it is true because it is true. (relevance issue)
27
FALLACIES IN INDUCTIVE LOGIC: EQUIVOCATION
The act of switching the meaning of a word to another meaning the the middle of the discourse without signaling that a change in meaning is occurring. 

An attempt is made to gain support for a position by using language that on the surface is appealing to an audience. (Clarification issue)
28
FALLACIES IN INDUCTIVE LOGIC: FALSE CAUSE (Ergo Propter Hoc or Post Hoc)
This approach argues conclusions which do not reasonably occur from the preceding conditions. The attempt is made to give the appearance of causation where there is non. (relevance issue)
29
FALLACIES IN INDUCTIVE LOGIC: HASTY/OVER-GENERALIZATION
Attempt to win support for a position by appealing to one example, or an extremely small group, which lacks the scope necessary to make the support credible. (quantitative issue)
30
FALLACIES IN INDUCTIVE LOGIC: SLIPPERY SLOPE
An extended false cause, in which supposed effects, or results, tend to “snowball” out of control, without demonstrating a reasonable connection between the “cause” and the presumed “effects.” (relevance issue)
31
TERMS: Ontology
The branch of metaphysics dealing with the nature of being.
32
TERMS: Metaphysics
The branch of philosophy that deals with the first principles of things, including abstract concepts such as being, knowing, substance, cause, identity, time, and space.
33
TERMS: Teleology
The explanation of phenomena in terms of the purpose they serve rather than of the cause by which they arise.