Kathryn hume's surviving your academic job hunt

Philosophy

The Power of Ideas

TENTH EDITION

Brooke Noel Moore and Kenneth Bruder with Anne D’Arcy, Feminist Philosopher

California State University, Chico

i

2

PHILOSOPHY: THE POWER OF IDEAS, TENTH EDITION

Published by McGraw-Hill Education, 2 Penn Plaza, New York, NY 10121. Copyright © 2019 by McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. Previous

editions © 2014, 2011, and 2008. No part of this publication may be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means, or stored in a database or retrieval system, without the prior written

consent of McGraw-Hill Education, including, but not limited to, in any network or other electronic storage or transmission, or broadcast for distance learning.

Some ancillaries, including electronic and print components, may not be available to customers outside the United States.

This book is printed on acid-free paper.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 LCR 21 20 19 18

ISBN 978-1-259-32052-1

MHID 1-259-32052-9

Portfolio Manager: Jamie Laferrera

Product Developer: Alexander Preiss

Marketing Manager: Meredith Leo

Content Project Manager: Maria McGreal

Buyer: Sandy Ludovissy

Design: Lumina Datamatics, Inc.

Content Licensing Specialist: Melisa Seegmiller

Cover Image: Original artwork created by Jacqui Langeland

Compositor: Lumina Datamatics, Inc.

All credits appearing on page or at the end of the book are considered to be an extension of the copyright page.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: Moore, Brooke Noel, author. | Bruder, Kenneth, author.

Title: Philosophy : the power of ideas / Brooke Noel Moore, California State

University, Chico Kenneth Bruder, California State University, Chico.

Description: TENTH EDITION. | Dubuque, IA : McGraw-Hill Education, 2017. |

Includes bibliographical references and index.

Identifiers: LCCN 2017043986 | ISBN 9781259320521 (pbk. : alk. paper)

Subjects: LCSH: Philosophy—Textbooks.

Classification: LCC BD21 .M66 2017 | DDC 100—dc23

LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2017043986

The Internet addresses listed in the text were accurate at the time of publication. The inclusion of a website does not indicate an endorsement by the authors or McGraw-Hill Education, and

McGraw-Hill Education does not guarantee the accuracy of the information presented at these sites.

mheducation.com/highered

ii

3

https://lccn.loc.gov/2017043986
http://mheducation.com/highered
To Marianne Moore; Kathryn Dupier Bruder and Albert Bruder; and Xandria iii

iv

4

Contents

Preface

Chapter 1 Dark Blue Velvet Goombas

Questions

Pressing or Fundamental?

Misconceptions

Tool Kit

Argument

The Socratic Method

Thought Experiments

Reductio ad Absurdum

Fallacies

Divisions of Philosophy

The Benefits of Philosophy

Checklist

Key Terms and Concepts

Questions for Discussion and Review

Links

Suggested Further Readings

v

Part One METAPHYSICS AND EPISTEMOLOGY: EXISTENCE AND KNOWLEDGE

Chapter 2 The Pre-Socratics The Milesians

Pythagoras

Heraclitus and Parmenides

Empedocles and Anaxagoras

The Atomists

Checklist

Key Terms and Concepts

Questions for Discussion and Review

Suggested Further Readings

Chapter 3 Socrates, Plato Socrates

Plato

Plato’s Metaphysics: The Theory of Forms

Plato’s Theory of Knowledge

Plato’s Theory of Love and Becoming

SELECTION 3.1 Plato: Apology

SELECTION 3.2 Plato: Republic

SELECTION 3.3 Plato: Meno

5

Checklist

Key Terms and Concepts

Questions for Discussion and Review

Suggested Further Readings

Chapter 4 Aristotle What Is It to Be?

Actuality and Possibility

Essence and Existence

Ten Basic Categories

The Three Souls

Aristotle and the Theory of Forms

vi

Aristotle’s Theory of Knowledge

Logic

SELECTION 4.1 Aristotle: The Categories

Checklist

Key Terms and Concepts

Questions for Discussion and Review

Suggested Further Readings

Chapter 5 Philosophers of the Hellenistic and Christian Eras Metaphysics in the Roman Empire

Plotinus

The Rise of Christianity

St. Augustine

Augustine and Skepticism

Hypatia

The Middle Ages and Aquinas

SELECTION 5.1 St. Augustine: Confessions

SELECTION 5.2 St. Thomas Aquinas: Summa Theologica: How God Is Known by Us

Checklist

Key Terms and Concepts

Questions for Discussion and Review

Suggested Further Readings

Chapter 6 The Rise of Modern Metaphysics and Epistemology Descartes and Dualism

Skepticism as the Key to Certainty

The “Clear and Distinct” Litmus Test

Hobbes and Materialism

Perception

The Alternative Views of Conway, Spinoza, and Leibniz

The Metaphysics of Anne Conway

Spinoza

Leibniz

The Idealism of Locke and Berkeley

John Locke and Representative Realism

George Berkeley and Idealism

Material Things as Clusters of Ideas

Berkeley and Atheism

vii

SELECTION 6.1 René Descartes: Meditations on First Philosophy

SELECTION 6.2 Benedictus de Spinoza: Ethics

SELECTION 6.3 George Berkeley: Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge

Checklist

Key Terms and Concepts

Questions for Discussion and Review

Suggested Further Readings

6

Chapter 7 The Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries David Hume

The Quarter Experiment

Hume on the Self

Hume on Cause and Effect

Immanuel Kant

The Ordering Principles of the Mind

Things-in-Themselves

The Nineteenth Century

The Main Themes of Hegel

Arthur Schopenhauer

SELECTION 7.1 David Hume: An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding

SELECTION 7.2 Immanuel Kant: Critique of Pure Reason

SELECTION 7.3 Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel: The Philosophy of History

Checklist

Key Terms and Concepts

Questions for Discussion and Review

Suggested Further Readings

Chapter 8 The Continental Tradition Brief Historical Overview of the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries

Existentialism

Psychoanalysis

Two Existentialists

Albert Camus

Jean-Paul Sartre

Sartre and Kant on Ethics

You Are What You Do

viii

Phenomenology

Edmund Husserl

Martin Heidegger

Poetry

Eastern Philosophy

Emmanuel Levinas

An Era of Suspicion

Jürgen Habermas

Michel Foucault

Structuralism versus Deconstruction

Jacques Derrida

Gilles Deleuze

Alain Badiou

Non-Philosophy

Checklist

Key Terms and Concepts

Questions for Discussion and Review

Suggested Further Readings

Chapter 9 The Pragmatic and Analytic Traditions Pragmatism

Richard Rorty

Analytic Philosophy

What Analysis Is

A Brief Overview of Analytic Philosophy

Language and Science

Experience, Language, and the World

Antirepresentationalism

Wittgenstein’s Turnaround

Quine, Davidson, and Kripke

Willard Van Orman Quine

Donald Davidson

Saul Kripke

7

Ontology

Meta-Ontology

Philosophical Questions in Quantum Mechanics

Checklist

Key Terms and Concepts

Questions for Discussion and Review

Suggested Further Readings

ix

Part Two MORAL AND POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY

Chapter 10 Moral Philosophy Skepticism, Relativism, and Subjectivism

Egoism

Hedonism

The Five Main Ethical Frameworks

The Early Greeks

Plato

Aesara, the Lucanian

Aristotle

Epicureanism and Stoicism

Epicureanism

The Stoics

Christianizing Ethics

St. Augustine

St. Hildegard of Bingen

Heloise and Abelard

St. Thomas Aquinas

Hobbes and Hume

Hobbes

Hume

Value Judgments Are Based on Emotion, Not Reason

Benevolence

Can There Be Ethics after Hume?

Kant

The Supreme Principle of Morality

Why You Should Do What You Should Do

The Utilitarians

Bentham

Mill

Friedrich Nietzsche

SELECTION 10.1 Plato: Gorgias

SELECTION 10.2 Aristotle: Ethics

SELECTION 10.3 Immanuel Kant: Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysic of Morals

SELECTION 10.4 John Stuart Mill: Utilitarianism

Checklist

Key Terms and Concepts

x

Questions for Discussion and Review

Suggested Further Readings

Chapter 11 Political Philosophy Plato and Aristotle

Plato

Aristotle

Natural Law Theory and Contractarian Theory

Augustine and Aquinas

Hobbes

Two Other Contractarian Theorists

8

John Locke

Locke and the Right to Property

Separation of Power

Jean-Jacques Rousseau

U.S. Constitutional Theory—Applied Philosophy

Natural Law and Rights in the Declaration of Independence

Natural Law and Rights in the U.S. Constitution

The Right to Privacy

Classic Liberalism and Marxism

Adam Smith

Utilitarianism and Natural Rights

Harriet Taylor

John Stuart Mill

Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel

Marxism

The Means of Production versus Productive Relations

Class Struggle

Capitalism and Its Consequences

Alienation

Capitalism Is Self-Liquidating

Marxism and Communism

Anarchism

SELECTION 11.1 Plato: The Republic

SELECTION 11.2 Thomas Hobbes: Leviathan

SELECTION 11.3 John Stuart Mill: On Liberty

Checklist

Key Terms and Concepts

Questions for Discussion and Review

Suggested Further Readings

xi

Chapter 12 Recent Moral and Political Philosophy G. E. Moore

Normative Ethics and Metaethics

Emotivism and Beyond

John Rawls, a Contemporary Liberal

The Fundamental Requirements of the Just Society

The Veil of Ignorance and the Original Position

The Two Principles of Social Justice

The Rights of Individuals

Why Should I Accept Rawls’s Provisions?

Robert Nozick’s Libertarianism

A Minimal State Is Justified

Only the “Night-Watchman” State Does Not Violate Rights

The Rights of Individuals

Communitarian Responses to Rawls

Alasdair MacIntyre and Virtue Ethics

Martha Nussbaum

Herbert Marcuse, A Recent Marxist

The Objectivism of Ayn Rand

“Isms”

Checklist

Key Terms and Concepts

Questions for Discussion and Review

Suggested Further Readings

Part Three PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION: REASON AND FAITH

Chapter 13 Philosophy and Belief in God Two Christian Greats

9

Anselm

The Ontological Argument

Gaunilo’s Objection

Aquinas

The First Way

The Second Way

The Third Way

The Fourth and Fifth Ways

xii

Mysticism

Seventeenth-Century Perspectives

Descartes

Descartes’s First Proof

Descartes’s Second Proof

Descartes’s Third Proof

Leibniz

Leibniz and the Principle of Sufficient Reason

Leibniz and the Problem of Evil

Eighteenth- and Nineteenth-Century Perspectives

Hume

Hume and the Argument from Design

Hume and the Cosmological Argument

A Verbal Dispute?

Kant

What Is Wrong with the Ontological Proof?

What Is Wrong with the Cosmological and Teleological Proofs?

Belief in God Rationally Justified

Kierkegaard

Nietzsche

James

More Recent Perspectives

God and Logical Positivism

Mary Daly: The Unfolding of God

Intelligent Design or Evolution?

God, the Fine-Tuner

Who Needs Reasons for Believing in God?

SELECTION 13.1 St. Thomas Aquinas: Summa Theologica

SELECTION 13.2 Friedrich Nietzsche: The Joyful Wisdom

Checklist

Key Terms and Concepts

Questions for Discussion and Review

Suggested Further Readings

Part Four MORE VOICES

Chapter 14 Feminist Philosophy The First Wave

The Second Wave

The Third Wave

xiii

The Fourth Wave

The Fifth Wave

Analytic Feminist Philosophy

Continental Feminist Philosophy

Feminist Moral Theory

Sexism and Language

Feminist Epistemology

Two Contemporary American Feminist Philosophers

Mary Daly

Judith Butler: Gender, Sex, and Performativity

10

French Feminist Philosophy and Psychoanalytical Theory

Simone de Beauvoir

Luce Irigaray

Julia Kristeva (1941–)

Hélène Cixous (1937–)

“Laugh of the Medusa”

Feminist Perspectives on Important Philosophers

Aristotle

Augustine

Descartes

Kant

Nietzsche

Ludwig Wittgenstein

Ayn Rand

Jacques Derrida

SELECTION 14.1 Mary Wollstonecraft: A Vindication of the Rights of Woman

Checklist

Key Terms and Concepts

Questions for Discussion and Review

Suggested Further Readings

Chapter 15 Eastern Influences Hinduism

Buddhism

Buddha

Taoism

Lao Tzu

Sun Tzu

Chuang Tzu

xiv

Confucianism

Confucius

Mencius

Hsün Tzu

Zen Buddhism in China and Japan

Hui Neng

Buddhism in Japan

Murasaki Shikibu

Dōgen Kigen

The Philosophy of the Samurai (c. 1100–1900)

The Influence of Confucius

The Influence of Zen Buddhism

Philosophy East and West

SELECTION 15.1 Confucius: The Analects of Confucius

Checklist

Key Terms and Concepts

Questions for Discussion and Review

Suggested Further Readings

Chapter 16 Postcolonial Thought Historical Background

Africa

Oral and Traditional Philosophy

Person

Historiography

The Nature of Philosophy

The Good Life

The Americas

African American Thought

Social Justice

Feminism

Afrocentrism

11

Social Activism

Latin American Thought

Ontology

Metaphysics of the Human

Gender Issues

South Asia

Satyagraha

Metaphysics

xv

Checklist

Key Terms and Concepts

Questions for Discussion and Review

Suggested Further Readings

Chapter 17 Four Philosophical Problems Free Will

Psychological Determinism

Neuroscientific Determinism

Causal Determinism

Consciousness

Dualism

Behaviorism

Identity Theory

Functionalism

Zombies

The Ethics of Generosity: The Problem of The Gift

What Is Art? and Related Problems in Aesthetics

What Is Art?

A Paradox of Fiction

The Puzzle of Musical Expression

Envoi

Checklist

Key Terms and Concepts

Questions for Discussion and Review

Suggested Further Readings

Index/Glossary xvi

12

Preface

This is a straightforward ungimmicky introduction to philosophy written especially for first- and second-year university students. It contains separate historical overviews of the main subjects of Western philosophy and includes both the Analytic and the Continental traditions. It also covers Eastern philosophy, postcolonial philosophy, and feminist philosophy and contains a chapter devoted to major philosophical problems. We hope readers will learn that thinking deeply about almost anything can lead them into philosophy.

The following are important changes in the tenth edition:

Revised and updated first chapter, making philosophy appealing to today’s students

New introduction to Analytic philosophy and Continental philosophy (Chapter 8; The Continental Tradition)

New section on Non-Philosophy (non-philosophie) by Francois Laruelle in Chapter 8

Substantially revised Chapter 14 (Feminist Philosophy), with new sections on The Fifth Wave, Analytic feminist philosophy vs Continental feminist philosophy, and Mary Daly; and revised treatment of Judith Butler, Simone de Beauvoir, and Ayn Rand

New section covering feminist perspectives on major philosophers (Chapter 14)

New Box on the Philosophy and The Simpsons (Chapter 17)

Philosophy—Powerful Ideas

We concluded years ago that most people like philosophy if they understand it and that most understand it if it isn’t presented to them in exhausting prose. In this text, we strive to make philosophy understandable while not oversimplifying.

Which is not to say that everyone who understands philosophy is attracted to it. Philosophy is just not for everyone, and no text and no instructor can make it so. We do hope, however, that readers of this book will at least learn that philosophy is more than inconsequential mental flexing. Philosophy contains powerful ideas, and it affects the lives of real people.

xvii

Philosophy: A Worldwide Search for Wisdom and Understanding

Until the middle of the last century, most philosophers and historians of ideas in American and European universities thought philosophical reflection occurred only within the tradition of disciplined discourse that began with the ancient Greeks and has continued into the present. This conception of philosophy has changed however, first through the interest in Eastern thought, especially Zen Buddhism, in the 1950s, then through the increasingly widespread publication of high-quality translations and commentaries of texts from outside the Western tradition in the following decades. Of course, the availability of such texts does not mean that unfamiliar ideas will receive a careful hearing or even that they will receive any hearing at all.

Among the most challenging threads of the worldwide philosophical conversation is what has come to be known in recent years as postcolonial thought. The lines defining this way of thinking are not always easy to draw—but the same could be said for existentialism, phenomenology, and a number of other schools of thought in philosophy. In any event, in many cultures and subcultures around the world, thinkers are asking searching questions about methodology and fundamental beliefs that are intended to have practical, political consequences. Because these thinkers frequently intend their work to be revolutionary, their ideas run a higher-than-usual risk of being lost to philosophy’s traditional venues. We include in this book a small sample from such writers.

Women in the History of Philosophy

Histories of philosophy make scant mention of women philosophers prior to the latter half of the twentieth century. For a long time it was assumed that lack of mention was due to a deficit of influential women philosophers. Scholarship such as that by Mary Ellen Waithe (A History of Women Philosophers) suggests that women have been more important in the history of philosophy than is often assumed. To date, we lack full-length translations and modern editions of the works of many women philosophers. Until this situation changes, Waithe argues, it is difficult to reconstruct the history of the discipline with accuracy.

This text acknowledges the contributions of at least some women to the history of philosophy. We include women philosophers throughout the text in their historical contexts, and we also present a chapter on feminist philosophy. In it, among other things, we now include a section on feminist perspectives on some of the important Western philosophers.

Features

Among what we think are the nicer attributes of this book are these:

Separate histories of metaphysics and epistemology; the Continental, pragmatic, and Analytic traditions; moral and political philosophy; feminist philosophy; and the philosophy of religion

xviii

A chapter on selected perennial philosophical problems, including the problem of free will, the problem of consciousness, the problem of the gift (ethics of generosity), and problems in aesthetics

A section comparing philosophy East and West

A section on philosophical issues in quantum mechanics

A section on zombies

Coverage of postmodernism and multiculturalism

A section titled “More Voices,” which contains chapters on Eastern influences, feminist philosophy, and postcolonial thought

13

Recognition of specific contributions of women to philosophy

A generous supply of easy, original readings that don’t overwhelm beginning students

Boxes highlighting important concepts, principles, and distinctions or containing interesting anecdotes or historical asides

Biographical profiles of many of the great philosophers

Online checklists of key philosophers, with mini-summaries of the philosophers’ leading ideas

End-of-chapter questions for review and reflection and online lists of additional sources

A pronunciation guide to the names of philosophers

A brief subsection on American Constitutional theory, never more controversial than today

A glossary/index that defines important concepts on the spot

Teachable four-part organization: (1) Metaphysics and Epistemology, (2) Moral and Political Philosophy, (3) Philosophy of Religion, and (4) More Voices

A section on arguments and fallacies

For instructors, online detailed lecture ideas for each chapter

The tenth edition of Philosophy: The Power of Ideas is now available online with Connect, McGraw-Hill Education’s integrated assignment and assessment platform. Connect also offers SmartBook for the new edition, which is the first adaptive reading experience proven to improve grades and help students study more effectively. All of the title’s website and ancillary content is also available through Connect, including:

A full Test Bank of multiple choice questions that test students on central concepts and ideas in each chapter.

An Instructor’s Manual for each chapter with full chapter outlines, sample test questions, and discussion topics.

Lecture Slides for instructor use in class.

xix

14

xx

15

xxi

16

Acknowledgments

Special thanks go to Zanja Yudell for writing a section on philosophical problems in quantum mechanics and to Rachel Steiner who provided art for this and some of the previous editions of the book.

Many friends and colleagues at California State University, Chico have helped us on this and earlier editions: Maryanne Bertram, Judy Collins-Hamer, Marcel Daguerre, Frank Ficarra, Jay Gallagher, Eric Gampel, Tony Graybosch, Ron Hirschbein, Tom Imhoff, Marie Knox, Scott Mahood, Clifford Minor, Adrian Mirvish, Anne Morrissey, Jim Oates, Richard Parker, Dick Powell, Michael Rich, Dennis Rothermel, Robert Stewart, Greg Tropea, Alan Walworth, and Wai-hung Wong.

Also, for their wise and helpful comments on the manuscript for earlier editions, we thank Ken King, previously Mayfield/McGraw-Hill; John Michael Atherton, Duquesne University; Stuart Barr, Pima Community College; Robert Beeson, Edison State College; Sherrill Begres, Indiana University of Pennsylvania; W. Mark Cobb, Pensacola Junior College; Gloria del Vecchio, Bucks County Community College; Ronald G. DesRosiers, Madonna College; Mark A. Ehman, Edison Community College; Thomas Eshelman, East Stroudsburg University; Robert Ferrell, University of Texas at El Paso; James P. Finn Jr., Westmoreland County Community College; Raul Garcia, Southwest Texas State University; Brenda S. Hines, Highland Community College; Chris Jackway, Kellogg Community College; August Lageman, Virginia Intermont College; Bernal Koehrsen Jr., Ellsworth Community College; Henry H. Liem, San José City College; Kenneth A. Long, Indiana University–Purdue University at Fort Wayne; Adrienne Lyles-Chockley, University of San Diego; Curtis H. Peters, Indiana University Southeast; Adrienne Regnier, Jefferson Community and Technical College; Richard Rice, La Sierra University; Harry Settanni, Holy Family College; William C. Sewell, Michigan Technological University; Douglas Thiel, Moorpark College/Oxnard College; and Chris Weigand, University of Central Oklahoma.

For the ninth edition, we are indebted to Edward M. Engelmann, Merrimack College; William Ferraiolo, San Joaquin Delta College; Daniel G. Jenkins, Montgomery College; Gonzalo T. Palacios, Prince George’s Community College; A. J. Kreider, Miami Dade College; James Craig Hanks, Texas State University; Clinton F. Dunagan, Northwest Vista College; and Christa Lynn Adams, Lakeland Community College.

For their sage advice on the tenth edition, we are indebted to Theresa Catalano-Reinhardt, Macomb Community College; Bryan Hilliard, Mississippi University for Women; Dr. Edward J. Grippe, Norwalk Community College; Robert E. Birt, Bowie State University; William S. Jamison, University of Alaska Anchorage; Robert Ferrell, El Paso Community College; Daniel G. Jenkins, Montgomery College; Chris Jakway, Kellogg Community College; Joe Mixie, Southern Connecticut State University; Bernal F. Koehrsen, Jr., Ellsworth Community College of the Iowa Valley Community College District; Elizabeth Shaw, Catholic University of America; Robert Paul Churchill, George Washington University; Matthew Kent, University of St. Thomas; and Michael Matthiesen, Miami Dade College.

We also thank the following McGraw-Hill staff and freelancers for their excellent work on the tenth edition: Sarah Merrigan Paratore, Arpana Kumari, Craig Leonard, Laura Wilk, and Lisa Bruflodt. Special thanks are due to Anita Silvers for putting us in touch with Dominic Mclver Lopes, to Ellen Fox for material on feminist philosophy, to Gregory Tropea for material on postcolonial thought, to Mary Ellen Waithe for explaining the thought of important women in the history of philosophy, and to Emerine Glowienka for helping us with Aquinas’s metaphysics.

xxii

17

W

1 Dark Blue Velvet

hat is philosophy? What do you know about it? Did you know that before there was science, literature, or mathematics there was only philosophy? It’s the umbrella discipline from which most other disciplines have evolved. The ancient Greeks, who invented philosophy, thought of any person who sought knowledge in any area as a philosopher. Thus, philosophy once encompassed nearly everything that counted as knowledge.

This view of philosophy persisted for more than two thousand years. In 1687, Sir Isaac Newton, universally regarded as one of the most important scientists of all time, set forth his renowned theories of physics, mathematics, and astronomy in the famous book Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy. At that time physics was still thought of as a variety of philosophy.

In fact, at some point nearly every subject currently listed in your university’s catalog would have been considered philosophy. If you continue your studies and obtain the highest degree in psychology, mathematics, economics, sociology, history, biology, political science, or practically any other subject, you will be awarded a PhD, the doctorate of philosophy. If you wear an academic gown for commencement or other ceremonies, regardless of your discipline, it will be trimmed in the dark blue velvet that represents philosophy. On your sleeves will be three blue velvet stripes, again representing that you have earned a doctorate of philosophy, regardless of your specific field.

Understanding the complete history of your own academic subject in most cases means knowing something about the history of philosophy. That’s what this book is intended to give you, a fairly detailed introduction to the history and problems of philosophy.

1

GOOMBAS

Would you be surprised to learn that you’ve been doing philosophy since you were a little boy or girl? Think about what you enjoyed then. Did you pretend you could wave a magic wand and sprinkle fairy dust on things? Did you imagine you had super powers and could fly? Did you read the book The Velveteen Rabbit—the one about the stuffed bunny who desperately wants to be real? Did you think about what is imaginary and what it is to be really real? Philosophy has plenty to say about that question—what it is to be really real and how we know it.

Did you play Super Mario and race through the Mushroom Kingdom and fight off Goombas? Then you were exploring power. Philosophy looks at the nature of power and at social relationships more generally. It also has plenty to say about ethics, acceptable behavior, and justice. Did you get in trouble when you did something that caused harm? Then you were looking at distinguishing right from wrong and building values to live by. Perhaps your parents taught you that there isn’t any objective principle that describes right and wrong, that you would have to form your own sense of it, your own ethics, as you grew older, but in the meantime you had to do as they said. Are there such things as correct values, or is it all relative? What about different cultural values? Is it all a matter of where you happened to be born when it comes to values? Is there such a thing as ethical principles that apply to all situations? All these questions belong in the discipline of philosophy.

Did your parents teach you to tell the truth? Philosophy explores the nature of truth. Did you learn from your mistakes? Then you gained knowledge. Philosophy examines what knowlege is and whether knowing truth is possible. Did you think twice before telling a fib the next time? Thinking twice is a form of reasoning. Philosophy asks if we can trust reason, how to reason carefully, and use evidence to support our arguments when we take a position.

Did you like to draw or sing or maybe use a music app or play an instrument? Philosophy explores questions like what is art? and what is music? It wonders, why do some arrangements of sights and sound qualify as art or music while others don’t?

If you’re leaving your teens, you may have unanswered questions about life. You may be examining the values you grew up with, the ones you were taught, and now you wonder if you are merely conditioned to adopt the rules and opinions of your family. How will you assess which is your opinion and which is theirs? You may be asking yourself, “Who am I?” If you are not a person of faith, you may be questioning whether God exists, whether there is such a thing as a soul, whether life has meaning if you don’t believe in God, and what is the meaning of life anyhow? What, if anything, happens after death? Where does your consciousness go, if anywhere? Is there such a thing as free will? Advances in neuroscience suggest that our brains make decisions before we’re conscious of the decisions. How does that change the concept of free will? In order to contemplate these questions, wouldn’t you have to know who you are, and what the self is? Philosophy is fascinated by these questions.

Well, then, what is philosophy? The word philosophy1 comes from the Greek word philein, which means “to love,” and sophia, which means “knowledge” or “wisdom.” This isn’t too helpful. We take the approach that you best understand what philosophy is by

2

looking at the questions it asks. You might be pleased to hear that philosophy also offers methods of inquiry for dealing with its questions and ways to attempt to arrive at conclusions you can accept.

QUESTIONS

The following are some of the philosophical questions we have already mentioned:

• What is it to be really real?

• How do we know what is really real?

• How do we know anything? What is knowledge?

• What is truth?

• What is the self? What is consciousness?

• Does life have meaning, a purpose?

• What happens, if anything, after death?

• Is there free will?

• What makes some actions right and others wrong? Is it all relative?

• What is art?

18

To this list we might add a few others:

• What is time?

• What is justice?

• Do people have natural rights?

• What are the ethically legitimate functions and scope of government?

• Do we have moral obligations to people we don’t know? To nonhuman living things? To the environment?

Clearly, it is possible to go through life without spending much time wondering about such questions. But most of us have at least occasional moments of reflection about one or another of them. In fact, it is difficult not to think philosophically from time to time. Whenever we think about a topic long enough, if our thinking is the least bit organized, we may end up engaged in philosophy.

For example, situations arise in which we must balance our own needs against the needs of others we are concerned about—an aging parent might require care, for instance. Of course, we will try to determine the extent of our obligation. But we may go beyond this and ask what makes this our obligation, or even more generally, what makes anything our obligation. Is it simply that it strikes us that way? Or is there some feature of situations that requires a certain response?

If we are led to questions like these, the rest of the university curriculum will be of little help. Other subjects tell us how things are or how they work or how they came about, but not what we should do or why we should do it. Unfortunately, when most people reach this point in their reflections, they really don’t know what to think next.

3

To take quite a different example of how philosophical questions crop up in everyday contexts, sci-fi movies often portray robots that think like people. Naturally, after seeing such a movie, or maybe just talking to Siri or Alexa, you might wonder if it may someday be possible to build a robot that can actually think? The question calls for a philosophical response. Of course, you might just wait and see what Google comes up with, but will that help? You can’t just observe whether robots are thinking. Even if scientists succeed in building a robot that walks and talks and acts like Ava or Kyoko in the movie Ex Machina, one still might reasonably deny that the robot actually thinks. “It isn’t made out of flesh and blood,” you might say. But then beings from other galaxies might think even though they are not made out of flesh and blood, so why must computers be made out of flesh and blood to think? Is it perhaps because machines don’t have souls or aren’t alive? Well, what is a soul, anyway? Why aren’t machines alive? What is it to be alive? These are philosophical questions. Philosophers have spent a great deal of time analyzing and trying to answer them.

Often, too, philosophers ask questions about things that seem so obvious we usually might not wonder about them—for example, the nature of change. That things change is obvious, and we might not see anything puzzling in the fact. If something changes, it becomes something different; so what?

For one thing, if we have a different thing, then we seem to be considering two things: the original thing and the new, different thing. Therefore, strictly speaking, shouldn’t we say not that something changed but rather that it was replaced? Suppose George Washington puts a new head on his axe. It’s still the same axe. Suppose the next year he replaces the handle. Still the same axe? Certainly George Washington thinks so; there can be no question about what he has in mind if he asks someone to bring him his axe. But is this right? Suppose we find the old handle and stick the old head on it. Isn’t that George Washington’s axe?

Perhaps this all seems to be a question of semantics and of no practical interest. But over the course of a lifetime, every molecule in a person’s body may possibly be replaced. Thus, we might wonder, say, whether an old man who has been in prison for forty years for a murder he committed as a young man is really the same person as the young man. Since (let us assume) not a single molecule of the young man is in the old man, wasn’t the young man in fact replaced? If so, can his guilt possibly pertain to the old man, who is in fact a different man? What is at stake here is whether the old man did in fact commit murder, and it is hard to see how this might be simply a matter of semantics.

PRESSING OR FUNDAMENTAL?

Philosophical questions, like the ones we have talked about, are among the most fundamental you can ask. That, of course, does not necessarily mean they are pressing questions. “How can I get this computer to run right?”—this is an example of a question that can be pressing in a way in which philosophical questions rarely are. You rarely have to drop what you are doing to answer philosophical questions.

But let’s look more carefully at this question: How can I get my computer to run right? Notice that the question relates to the quality of your life. Not knowing how to get

4

your computer working diminishes your ability to function efficiently. It impacts your life unfavorably. But what kind of life should you live in the first place? This is a philosophical question. And there is a sense in which it is more fundamental than the question about how to

get your computer to run right, because there are lives you might live in which you might not own a computer. Notice now that this question (what kind of life should you live?) implies that the life you live is up to you. However, is this really correct? Is it true that the life you live is

up to you? “Excuse me,” you may be saying. “What do you mean, is the life I lead up to me? Obviously it is up to me. Whatever I do is up to me. Nobody is making me read this book,

for example. I’m reading it because I want to read it.” No doubt most people think our voluntary actions are up to us. That’s sort of what it means to say than an action is voluntary. But what about our desires and values? Are

these up to us? After all, our voluntary actions stem from our desires and values. This question—are our desires and values really up to us?—is deeply philosophical. As an experiment, you might try to change a desire or a value by an act of will. Will yourself to believe, for example, that it is actually right or good to hurt kittens. Can you do it? We can’t either. Well, then, think of something you desire. Can you make yourself not desire it by an act of will? If you try such an experiment, it may not be so clear after all that your desires, values, actions, or the life you lead really is up to you.

MISCONCEPTIONS

You might think that something as old as philosophy would be fairly well understood by many or most people. Would you be surprised to learn that misconceptions of philosophy are common?

One misconception is the idea that one person’s philosophy is as correct as the next person’s and that any philosophical position is as good, valid, or correct as any other opinion. This idea is especially widespread when it comes to values. If one person thinks that people should contribute 10% of their income to their church, and another person disagrees, it may at first seem reasonable to say, Well, the first person’s view is true for that person, and the second person’s view is true for the other person. But if you look carefully, you will notice that the two may be disagreeing about whether people in general should contribute 10% of their income. If so, they cannot both be correct. If people in general should do such and such, then it cannot be that they need not do it.

Or let’s say you think hunting is cruel and inhumane, but your roommate doesn’t. He might say something like, Well, that’s okay for you, but that’s not what I think. What does he mean? Possibly he means just that it’s fine with him if you don’t like hunting, but he doesn’t think there is anything wrong with it. But let’s look at this more closely. When you said that hunting is cruel and inhumane, you probably didn’t mean just that it would be cruel and inhumane for you to hunt. You may well have meant that hunting is cruel and inhumane, period. You may well have meant that, in your view, it is cruel and inhumane for him to hunt, and he shouldn’t do it. If so, your opinion (that it is cruel and

5

19

inhumane for him to hunt) and his opinion (that it isn’t), cannot both be correct. Sometimes, when it seems as if opposing positions could both be correct, then closer inspection may disclose that in fact they couldn’t.

Another misconception about philosophy is that it is nothing but opinion. In fact, we should distance ourselves from this notion. This is because philosophy requires opinions to be supported by good reasoning. If you express your opinion without providing supporting reasoning, your philosophy teacher is apt to say something like, “Well, that is an interesting opinion,” but he or she won’t say that you have produced good philosophy. Philosophy requires supporting your opinions—which, by the way, can be hard work.

Another idea people sometimes have when they first enter into philosophy is that “truth is relative.” Now, there are numerous things a person might mean by that statement. If he or she means merely that people’s beliefs are relative to their perspectives or cultures, then there is no problem. If, however, the person means that the same sentence might be both true and not true depending on one’s perspective or culture, then he or she is mistaken. The same sentence cannot be both true and not true, and whatever a person wishes to convey by the remark, “Truth is relative,” it cannot be that. Of course, two different people from two different cultures or perspectives might mean something different by the same words, but that is a separate issue.

Does a tree falling in the forest make a sound when nobody is around to hear it? Never mind that! Is there even a forest if there is nobody to observe it? ©konradlew/Getty Images

6

A different sort of misconception people have about philosophy is that it is light reading, something you relax with in the evening after all the serious work of the day is done. In reality, philosophical writing generally takes time and effort to understand. Often it seems to be written in familiar, everyday language, but that can be deceiving. It is best to approach a work in philosophy with the kind of mental preparedness and alertness appropriate for a textbook in mathematics or science. You should expect to be able to read an entire novel in the time it takes to understand just a few pages of philosophy! To understand philosophy, you have to reread a passage several times and think about it a lot. If your instructor assigns what seem to be short readings, don’t celebrate. It takes much time to understand philosophy.

TOOL KIT

Philosophy isn’t light reading, and it isn’t mere expression of opinion. Philosophers support their positions with arguments, which (ideally) make it plain why the reasonable person will accept what they say.

Argument

When you support a position by giving a reason for accepting it, you are making an argument. Giving and rebutting arguments (a rebuttal of an argument is itself an argument) are the most basic of philosophical activities; they distinguish philosophy from mere opinion. Logic, the study of correct inference, is concerned with whether and to what extent a reason truly does support a conclusion.

To illustrate, if you tell someone you believe that God exists, that’s not philosophy. That’s just you saying something about yourself. Even if you add, “I believe in God because I was raised a Catholic,” that’s still just biography, not philosophy. If, however, you say, “God must exist because the universe couldn’t have caused itself,” then you have given an argument that God exists (or existed). This remark counts as philosophy.

But if you want to be good at philosophy, you must also consider challenges to and criticisms of your arguments. Such challenges are known as counterarguments. Suppose, for example, someone challenges your argument with “Well, if God can be self-caused, then why can’t the universe?” You are now being called upon to defend your assumption that the universe could not be self-caused. Good philosophizing requires the ability to reason correctly, to defend assumptions, and to anticipate and rebut rebuttals.

7

The Socratic Method

Philosophers have spent much time over the centuries trying to arrive at a proper understanding of several important concepts: truth, beauty, knowledge, justice, and others you will be reading about shortly. One of the most famous of all philosophers, the Greek philosopher Socrates [SOK-ruh-teez] (c. 470–399 B.C.E.), championed a method for doing this, which is now called the Socratic method. To see how this works, imagine that you and Socrates are discussing knowledge:

You: You’re asking me what knowledge is? Well, when you believe something very strongly, that’s knowledge.

Socrates: But that would mean that kids who believe in fairies actually know there are fairies, if they believe this strongly.

20

Y: That’s a good point. To know something, then, isn’t just to believe it very strongly. The belief also must be true.

S: That still doesn’t sound quite right. That means a mere hunch is knowledge, if a person believes it strongly, and it turns out to be correct.

Y: Well, you’re right again. So, for one to know something, one must believe it strongly, it must be true, AND it must NOT be a mere hunch. In other words, it must be based on good evidence or solid reasoning.…

The exchange might continue until you offer an analysis of knowledge with which Socrates cannot take issue. So, the Socratic method as practiced by Socrates involves proposing a definition, rebutting it by counterexample, modifying it in the light of the counterexample, rebutting

the modification, and so forth. Needless to say, the method can be practiced by one person within his or her own mind. Clearly, the method can help advance understanding of concepts, but it can also be used to improve arguments or positions.

If you are reading this book as part of a class in philosophy, you may see your instructor utilizing the Socratic method with the class.

Thought Experiments

When we asked you to try to make yourself think, through an effort of willing, that it is good to hurt kittens, we were asking you to conduct a thought experiment. Thought experiments are not uncommon in science; in philosophy, they are among the most common methods used to try to establish something. You will encounter thought experiments in this book, and although some of them may seem far-fetched, you shouldn’t discount them for that reason. For example, to establish whether time travel is possible, a philosopher might ask us to imagine someone stepping into a time machine, going back in time to before she was born and, while there, accidentally killing her parents. The thought experiment seems to show that, on one hand, the person existed at the time she entered the time machine; but, on the other hand, because her parents never gave birth to her,