| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Tom Trelogan
Forum Admin
1368 Posts |
 Posted - Jun 25 2010 : 09:12:45 AM
|
The first draft of your essay is due on July 7 -- just a week from next Wednesday. It's to be an essay on a question of your own choosing, but your choice is subject to my approval.
As I say in the syllabus: "The only bottom-line restrictions I have are these: (1) your question must be of philosophical interest and must be connected with at least one of our three central questions, and (2) your essay must take the form of a carefully reasoned defense of an answer to your question coupled with a response to at least one question or objection you anticipate your readers might have."
So I'm ready to start hearing proposals for essay questions. Let's do this right here in the forum. First come, first served. You might want to wait a week or so till you've gotten a chance to take a look at the Symposium and we've kicked off our discussion of our third central question, but if you already know what question you'd like to write, run it by me right here, and I'll give you the go-ahead if your question looks good to me. |
|
|
John Koban
Apprentice
40 Posts |
Posted - Jun 27 2010 : 5:32:21 PM
|
"Here, though, we must be very careful to distinguish between questions that have been invented and questions that at least seem to be real. Only the latter are likely to lead to true understanding of the world; the former merely expose the psychological condition of individuals and societies who invent them." Here is a link to the entire essay: http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=library&page=atkins_18_2
Above is a quotation from an essay by Dr. Peter Atkins. For my paper I was thinking about what is the difference between invented questions and questions that at least seem to be real; furthermore, what constitutes a real question, or what is the difference between an invented question and a real question? I would like to be a little more specific with the question for my paper, and if anyone has comments, criticisms or suggestions, they would certainly be welcome. |
 |
|
|
Tom Trelogan
Forum Admin
1368 Posts |
Posted - Jun 28 2010 : 08:42:32 AM
|
| The question you choose to write on in your essay has to be connected to at least one of our three central questions. I don't see how this one is. Is there perhaps some connection I'm missing? |
|
|
|
Aaron Mund
Apprentice
37 Posts |
|
|
Tom Trelogan
Forum Admin
1368 Posts |
Posted - Jun 29 2010 : 1:57:11 PM
|
| Aaron, are you talking about logical consistency? As we saw eventually in our discussions in the thread on what consistency has to do with knowledge, it's only logical consistency that has anything interesting to do with knowledge. |
|
|
|
Aaron Mund
Apprentice
37 Posts |
Posted - Jun 29 2010 : 11:45:29 PM
|
| Yes that is what I was going for. I was having trouble trying to find the right way to put it. Would it be better to change the question to: Logical consistency and what it has to do with learning? |
|
|
|
Cassie Vrooman
Apprentice
32 Posts |
|
|
Tom Trelogan
Forum Admin
1368 Posts |
Posted - Jun 30 2010 : 08:30:19 AM
|
| Aaron, all that worries me about your trying to tackle the question: "What does logical consistency have to do with learning?" in your essay is that it's such a broad, sprawling question that it's hard to see how you could answer it at all fully in such a short piece. You're up against a length limit here of 800-1,600 words -- roughly two to four pages. Do you already have a thesis in mind? If I knew at least the broad outlines of the answer you were interested in trying to defend, I might be able to suggest a way of tailoring your question to your thesis. |
|
|
|
Tom Trelogan
Forum Admin
1368 Posts |
Posted - Jun 30 2010 : 08:36:59 AM
|
| Cassie, what's the question you'd be trying to answer? Is it "Can knowledge be gained by the use of reason and logic alone?" The most plausible answer to that question is that some can and some can't. But what does that have to do with economics? Is your question something far more specific such as this: "Can economic decisions be made on the basis of reason and logic alone?" Is there anyone who thinks that that is possible? Isn't that a straw man? |
|
|
|
Aaron Mund
Apprentice
37 Posts |
|
|
Cassie Vrooman
Apprentice
32 Posts |
Posted - Jun 30 2010 : 11:55:04 AM
|
My question is much more specific like the one you have posted. I am trying to nail down the exact question, but the one you have suggested is almost there.
In economics there is a general assumption, among many assumptions that I feel are too large, that people are rational in decision-making. To be rational in one's decision-making is to make decisions based on reason and logic alone; so the assumption is that people make decisions based on reason and logic alone. The reason for this assumption -- for all assumptions -- is to make economic modeling easier, so yes, there are people who support this assumption.
Rather than "Can economic decisions be made on the basis of reason and logic alone?" what I think I want to ask is something like... "Are people rational in decision making?... Do people make decisions on the basis of reason and logic alone?... Is it even possible for people to make decisions on the basis of reason and logic alone?" |
|
|
|
Tom Trelogan
Forum Admin
1368 Posts |
Posted - Jun 30 2010 : 1:35:01 PM
|
| Cassie, why do you think that to be rational in one's decision-making is to make decisions based on reason and logic alone? Certainly, economic decision-making can be rational and informed by empirical data. If it weren't informed by empirical data, it couldn't get off the ground. I don't know the economic theories you're talking about, but I'd guess that all that the assumption of a "rational consumer" involves is the stipulation that the consumer isn't basing his or her decisions on such irrational or non-rational factors as emotion (fear, anger, and so on). It still feels to me as if you're setting up a straw man here to argue against: a position no one would ever actually take. Can you put me on to something in the economic literature that would persuade me either that all economists or some economists think that consumers make decisions without having any factual information at their disposal whatsoever? Or is what you mean when you say "to be rational in one's decision-making is to make decisions based on reason and logic alone" actually this: to be rational is one's decision-making is to make decisions based on nothing but reason, logic, and purely factual information -- including, of course, information about one's needs, desires, and so on? |
|
|
|
Tom Trelogan
Forum Admin
1368 Posts |
Posted - Jun 30 2010 : 1:56:57 PM
|
Aaron, your response helps a lot. But you know. since actions aren't statements, they can't actually be logically inconsistent with the things that people say. Logical consistency is defined in terms of the possibility of statements being true or false, and actions, not being statements, aren't either true or false. So one of the things you're going to need to do is figure out just what consistency between statements and actions is -- how that should be defined. That's going to make your task a bit harder. It looks as if your question would have to be a two-parter and go something like this: (1) What is it to act in a way that is inconsistent with the claims that one makes (or perhaps simply: with one's principles), and (2) how important is it for effective parenting for parents to make sure that they not only talk the talk to their kids, but that they walk the walk as well -- in other words, that they live in accordance with the principles that they preach?
That might be manageable, though it's ambitious.
You know, there's another consideration that complicates things a good deal: what if parents believe all sorts of nonsense and tell their children all sorts of ridiculous things about how they should live their lives but actually function in spite of that as really good role models and succeed in bringing up really admirable children? In this case, too, there's inconsistency between what the parents do and what they say. Is this troublesome in the same way that inconsistency of the first type is troublesome?
Finally, aren't there purely empirical questions here that you're not going to have a chance of settling by means of philosophical argumentation, such as the question of what really winds up shaping the lives of children, the things people tell them, or the examples that their elders set? If so, is this going to muddy the waters? If at least part of the question is "Should parents lead by example and not by words?" then it would appear that these empirical considerations are going to be the considerations that are of primary importance and you're going to have to do empirical research you really don't have time to do or rely on research that's already been done by others.
|
|
|
|
Richard Mikel
Apprentice
32 Posts |
|
|
Tom Trelogan
Forum Admin
1368 Posts |
Posted - Jun 30 2010 : 6:44:49 PM
|
Richard, I'd have expected the clause that begins "Sokrates may be in touch with his realities" to end: "but are his realities the only realities?" What you've got instead ("but is that necessarily the definition of reality") doesn't fit together grammatically with the rest of the sentence. What's the antecedent of "that"?
Whatever the answer to that question may be, I like the idea of a paper on what Sokrates calls the realities. I assume that the question you're thinking of tackling isn't just "do people have different opinions about things such as what circularity is or what deskhood is or what courage is?" That's not a philosophical question at all. It's a purely empirical question the answer to which is, obviously, "yes, of course they do." So what else could vary from one person to the next besides their opinions when it comes to what the realities are? I'm not yet clear about that. You're thinking that Sokrates' circularity might not be your circularity or my circularity...but the thing that's escaping me altogether is what we're even talking about when we attach a possessive pronoun to a noun like "circularity." What is Sokrates' circularity? How could there be multiple circularities? You can count circles, can you actually count circularity? Isn't that sort of like trying to count water? |
|
|
|
Aaron Mund
Apprentice
37 Posts |
Posted - Jul 01 2010 : 12:41:53 PM
|
I am not just talking about parents and their actions and statements. I also want to discuss teachers (teachers = leaders, bosses, mentors, school teachers, doctors, etc.) who are inconsistent and the problems that this causes. I have learned a lot from people's actions and statements. While actions may not be "statements," they do give evidence, reveal one's opinions and beliefs. They can also be used to logically make decisions.
If "logically consistent" is not the right term to use, then what would be a better term to use? Although actions cannot be true and false they can be combined with statements in order to take the best course of action. That is what I am trying to say. Logic is something people begin to use at a young age, and when teachers say one thing and do another we realize what has occurred. I had one professor last semester who used statistics to show that minorities such as African Americans and Hispanics make less than whites. These were presented as facts. But then when the Asian statistics from the same source, and in the same format were discussed, she proceeded to disprove them with her opinion. These stats were presented as false. Being a student I realized the inconsistency. How can one be true and one be false when there is no difference rather than the subject? This combination of statements and actions and inconsistency affected what I saw to be right and affected my opinion of the credibility of the the things this teacher said. I also remember a mentor who told me how to best handle my Marines. Then I saw him handle his Marines the same way. I learned a lot from his actions and statements and from the consistency of his actions with his statements. I also used logic (a system of reasoning) or (sensible and rational thought) to come to a conclusion.
I am also confused on the latter part of the reply. It seems like it is taking what I was trying to focus on and turning it into a broad topic of what is good and bad, what is right and wrong -- are teachers always right? This is not the direction I am trying to go in. I would also need a month to write a paper that could answer this topic well.
Would this be a better question: What is the importance of consistency in a teacher to the student, mentored, or child?
[Lightly edited to enhance readability -TT] |
|
|
|
Tom Trelogan
Forum Admin
1368 Posts |
Posted - Jul 01 2010 : 10:05:22 PM
|
| Aaron, I think you ought to just stick with the term "consistency." Clearly what you care about isn't just logical consistency, and clearly what you want to focus on is the relation between learning and consistency, in some really broad sense of the term, in teachers. So why not just make your question this: "How is our learning affected by consistency or inconsistency in what our teachers say and do?" You'll have to make it clear what you take the philosophical interest of this to be. I must confess that it still looks like a purely empirical question to me, but perhaps you'll be able to convince me otherwise. If you're prepared to risk failure on that score, your question has my approval. |
|
|
|
Richard Mikel
Apprentice
32 Posts |
Posted - Jul 02 2010 : 4:26:12 PM
|
| So I'll be working with "Are Sokrates' realities the only realities?" if that's all right with you. |
|
|
|
Andrew Koziuk
Apprentice
34 Posts |
Posted - Jul 02 2010 : 5:40:10 PM
|
| Tom, I have been thinking all week on what I could do my essay on and I believe I came up with a good question. I was curious if I could do mine on what I think Sokrates means by being "wise." |
|
|
|
John Koban
Apprentice
40 Posts |
|
|
Tom Trelogan
Forum Admin
1368 Posts |
Posted - Jul 03 2010 : 08:38:03 AM
|
Richard, as I said in my first response to you in this thread, I have no clear idea what you're talking about when you speak of "Sokrates' realities." Could you explain that to me? Right now, the meaning of your question is still really eluding me altogether. I can't figure out whether you're asking - whether there are other senses of the word "reality" besides the sense in which Sokrates uses the expression when he speaks as he does, for example, in the Phaedo, of the realities, or
- whether the particular realities in his sense of the word in which he's especially interested are the only realities in his sense of the word i.e., whether his interests in philosophy are rather limited, or
- whether there might be a difference between, for example, what Sokrates thinks justice is and what someone else thinks it is and whether other people's opinions about such a thing are just as good as his, or
- whether there might be a difference between what justice is in Sokrates' little private universe and what it is in someone else's own little private universe, or....
Do you see the problem? In short: I can't figure out what you're asking at all. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Essay Topics: Submit 'Em Right Here!
