Essay

1
Lecture 6

• Essay 1 and writing a philosophy paper
• Brain teasers
• The Problem of Induction
• Humes conclusion
• How, if at all, do his arguments need updating
  (or have we solved the problem of induction?)

2
Essays

• Essay 1 is now due May 6 rather than April 28,
  at the beginning of section.
• For the topic and directions, use the link Paper
  Topics on the main webpage.
• In sections, you will engage in peer review of
  drafts of your essays (date to be announced).
• If you want your TA to read a draft and provide
  feedback (you are seeking W credit), you must get
  it to him by
• Due date/time is firm. You will lose credit if
  your paper is late.

3
Essays

• Writing a philosophy paper
• Unless otherwise noted, a philosophy paper is
  not a research paper. Your sources should only
  include course readings, discussions, lectures,
  films, etc. Strong words of advice do not use
  the internet!
• Common types of philosophy papers
• Explication (of an issue and argument -- our
  first essay)
• Assertion papers (I agree that x for reasons
  a,b,c)
• Refutations (I disagree for reasons a,b,c)
• Position papers (What objectivity is or is
  not
• Dialogues
• Case studies (to draw a philosophical conclusion)

4
Essays

• Writing in philosophy serves three purposes
  clarification, exploration, and communication.
• The simple act of writing something down makes
  thinking easier (particularly about topics or
  issues that are abstract and/or complex).
• Writing also provides a concrete way to re-think
  your ideas or assumptions you may find your
  original assumption unclear, not fully warranted,
  wrong, and so forth.
• Writing is the chief mode of communicating in
  philosophy if you want to demonstrate your
  understanding to a professor, if you want to
  relate an abstract idea to your own experience,
  if you want to persuade someone that your
  position is the correct one

5
Essays

• Many of us enter university without having
  learned the skills needed to write a good
  philosophy paper or essay.
• Learning these skills is incremental (moving, for
  example, from writing a paper that seeks to
  explicate an issue and relevant arguments, to
  writing a position paper).
• Things to keep in mind as you begin work on your
  first essay
• Writing is a process, not an end product or a
  last-minute grind.
• Pre-writing be sure you understand the
  assignment. Ask for clarification if you are not
  sure.
• Some find brainstorming and free writing
  helpful.

6
Essays

• Writing is a process, not an end product or a
  last-minute grind.
• Pre-writing
• Scheduling have a plan for when a first draft
  will be complete (at least before peer reviews in
  section), when you will return to it to take a
  closer look, and when you will spend time
  polishing the final version.
• Revising a paper is one of the few chances we
  have in life for a second chance.

7
Essays

• Revising in light of anothers review or your
  own
• Introduction
• Does it clearly define the topic and forecast
  the rest of the essay? (yes or needs attention
  -- with recommendations)
• Body of essay
• Transition from introduction
• Use of example(s) well executed, appropriate
  example?
• Completeness of information (accurate and
  complete explication of an argument)
• Conclusion
• Transition from body of essay
• Summation
• CLARITY, CLARITY, CLARITY

8
Part II

• Logic Puzzles
• (Mental gymnastics before we approach Hume!)

9
Part III

• Humes Problem of Induction

10
Inductive reasoning

• Science and we assume causation (cause and effect
  relationships)
• For empiricists, all the evidence there is for
  empirical knowledge concerning matters of fact,
  including scientific knowledge is sensory
  experience
• For some empiricists including Hume we move
  from individual experiences/singular statements
  to generalizations/universal statements using
  induction (and we certainly do this a lot)
  presuming causation.

11
Empirical generalizations

• Millions of ravens have been observed and all
  are black.
• A non-black raven has never been observed.
• --------------------------------------------------
  -------
• All ravens are black
• Are, like other forms of inductive arguments,
  ampliative the conclusion goes beyond the
  premises
• Reasoning moves from the past and present to the
  future
• From what has been experienced to what has not
• From a finite (however large) set of experiences
  to an infinite number of occurrences

12
Humes question

• What justifies our use of induction?
• What warrants our using it?
• He believes there are two places to look for such
  justification
• Our experiences (which concern matters of fact)
• Reason (which he calls relations of ideas and
  demonstrative knowledge). What he means is
  deductively valid reasoning as we find in
  mathematics, etc..
• And proposes we explore each to see if we can
  discover what justifies inductive reasoning

13
Humes question

• Can reason (demonstrative knowledge) provide the
  justification?
• No.
• There is no necessary connection (as there is in
  2 2 4) between
• Ive always (and so has everyone else)
  experienced that X causes Y
• and
• The next X I encounter will cause Y
• It is possible, reason tells us, that despite all
  previous experiences, in our next encounter x
  will not cause y!

14
Humes question

• Can reason (demonstrative knowledge) provide the
  justification?
• No.
• The argument is inductive, not deductively valid.
• It is ampliative moving from the past and
  present to the future, and moving from a finite
  (however large) set of experiences to the future
  and an infinite set of occurrences.
• So reason (as Hume understands it) cannot justify
  inductive reasoning.

15
Humes question

• Can experience justify our use of induction?
• Say, we argue
• Induction has worked in the past and present to
  allow us to predict events/phenomena.
• -------------------------------------------------
  -------------------------
• So, induction will work in the future to allow
  us to predict events/phenomena.
• If this reasoning doesnt justify induction, why
  doesnt it?
• Its circular its using inductive reasoning to
  justify inductive reasoning!

16
Humes question

• Can experience justify our use of induction?
• Maybe if we add a premise
• Say, we argue
• Induction has worked in the past and present to
  allow us to predict events/phenomena.
• Nature is uniform
• -------------------------------------------------
  -------------------------
• So, induction will work in the future to allow
  us to predict events/phenomena.
• This is a deductively valid argument, so why
  cant it solve the problem of induction?

17
Humes conclusions

• Inductive reasoning is just a habit of ours and
  cannot be justified on either empirical grounds
  or through reason.
• But it seems to be an unavoidable habit, common
  to young children as well as adults.
• So the skeptical conclusion that it cannot be
  justified is limited in its actual
  consequences.
• We all (including Hume!) will continue to engage
  in it and should go on living as if it is okay
  but realizing, at a philosophical level, that it
  isnt justifiable.
• So, I (says Hume) will go on tonight to have a
  glass of my favorite wine, listen to my favorite
  music, assume the sun will rise tomorrow, and so
  forth

18
Salmons physics studentwho is also studying
Hume!

• First hypothesis Humes problem is not any
  longer a problem as those secret powers he
  refers to (for example, why bread nourishes us)
  are now known.
• Given that we now know many causes he didnt
  know, we also know why inductive reasoning from
  past and present to future, from a finite number
  of cases to an infinite number, is justified.

19
Salmons physics studentwho is also studying
Hume!

• Second hypothesis Humes problem is not any
  longer a problem because since his time, we have
  discovered many laws of nature conservation of
  energy, conservation of momentum, etc. which
  allow us to predict (correctly) the outcome of
  any and all relevant experiments and occurrences.
• His professors in physics and research assistants
  have shown him many experiments that demonstrate
  the laws are true and without exceptions!

20
Salmons physics student

• And given increased knowledge in a variety of
  sciences, we now know that the argument
• On every day in recorded time, the sun rose (and
  on days before recorded time, if it had not,
  organisms would have died and we could verify
  that).
• Physics and astronomy explain why the sun always
  rises.
• --------------------------------------------------
  ---------------
• So, the sun always rises (or will rise tomorrow)
• is deductively valid.

21
The physics students professors

• His philosophy TA did your physics professor say
  that the laws of conservation of energy and
  momentum are, by their nature, inviolable, or
  that there are no known exceptions? The latter!
• His physics professors to whom he asks Is it
  possible that any or all of these laws will stop
  holding tomorrow or on some future date?
• Their answer Yes. There is no guarantee, based
  on either all of our experiences or our theories,
  that nature will continue to behave the way it
  has in the future. We believe it based on faith.

22
What to think of the problem of induction?

• Many have worked to develop probability theories
  so as to be able to replace provable with
  probable to some degree or other as useful in
  evaluating empirical/scientific theories.
• Strictly speaking, the probability of a
  generalization or universal statement (of which
  hypotheses and theories are kinds thereof) based
  on a finite number of occurrences/events
  however large is zero. But if we dont assume
  anyone can have a goddesss eye view, we can
  settle for a less exacting understanding of
  probability.

23
What to think of the problem of induction?

• Can evolutionary theory and/or cognitive science
  help with the problem?
• Suppose, as they propose and seems reasonable,
  that for our ancestors, classifying plants,
  animals, other humans, and physical events
  brought helpful order to their world view and
  enabled them to make predictions (Dont go near
  tigers when theyre hungry or you, like our
  friend Joe, will be their lunch) that enhanced
  their survival.

24
What to think of the problem of induction?

• Can evolutionary theory and/or cognitive science
  help with the problem?
• Well it would explain the habit Hume described,
  but would it justify the use of induction?
• No, as it remains the case that there is nothing
  we can point to in terms of our experiences or
  theories that guarantees that nature will remain
  uniform
• Even in the next fifteen minutes.
• So we might need to settle for explanation rather
  than justification of inductive reasoning.