Philosophy Essay Example for Free

Philosophy Essay 1. How do philosophical questions differ from scientific or factual questions? Philosophy specializes in questions that cannot be answered scientifically, mainly because there are not elements of the question that can be measured or tested empirically. Philosophy questions things and the answers are sought to be more opinionated and based on certain points of view. Philosophy focuses on questions similar to â€Å"how does this work. † A philosophical question that is beneficial is anything that has to do with life, death, or the universe. Philosophical questions do not possess definite answers, and they do not require measurements. For instance, a question could read, â€Å"What makes a great dad? † One person may answer the question saying, qualities that make a great dad would include spending one on one time with the child, always attending school functions and events, and always making time for the children. While this answer could be true for that individual another individual could answer the question saying, a great dad is one who provides all necessities for the family through financial stability, and actions that prove he cares. Both of these answers can possess the capability of being correct because the question is based on personal opinions and there is no definite way to define this. The science approach attempts to answer all the questions that it can empirically, but this is sometimes not possible. The reason some of the times it is not possible is because the questions increase over time and with the advances in technology. As technology expands the more questions that it rises to science and the more questions that are left without a scientific answer. The specific feature of science is to measure and weigh everything. Factual is evidence in themselves and are therefore established. Philosophy and science have much in common. Many of the greatest philosophers were also scientists, or possessed the quality to be categorized as one in his or her time period. Philosophers approach questions similarly to the way scientists do with his or her critical thinking. Scientists formulate theories and then test them against what they can observe or reason. Scientific questions implies that an individual is inquiring about the world around him or her and expecting precise answers. A scientific question possesses an independent variable and a dependent variable in it. A factual question is a question about a fact, â€Å"where did this event happen? † is factual because it is asking for facts. But a scientific or factual question are ones that possess the ability to be answered through verification which will produce some types of definite answers that are measurable and concrete proof. An example of this type of question would include, â€Å"how tall is sally? † The answer that an individual comes up with will be accurate because he or she takes the scientific measurements to answer the question to eliminate speculations. However, speculations could occur while answering how tall Sally is because one could say well is that Sally’s accurate height, because when an individual first awakens they are taller than they are in the evening. When an individual first awaken his or her body has had time to relax and stretch out for the evening sleep, and if measurements were taken during the day or at night the body has not maintained the ability to stretch out causing the individual to be shorter. Personally the way around this would be to measure Sally three times once in the morning, the middle of the afternoon, and finally in the evening. 2. How did the approaches to philosophical inquiry progress from the Pre-Socratics to Socrates, Plato, and finally to Aristotle? How do these changing approaches reflect cultural influences that affected the philosophers of ancient Greece? The philosophical inquiry process during the pre-Socrates era was based mainly on metaphysics which asks what the nature of being is. The Socrates era began to question viewpoints that began asking and answering questions to stimulate an individuals’ critical thinking and in turn illuminating ideas, this began to form a debate and inquiry between individuals’ opposing this view. The dialectical method is a process that the Socrates began and involves oppositional discussions. This method involves oppositional discussions that defend one point of view against another point of view. One individual may lead others to contract his or her point of view in turn strengthening the inquirer’s view point. Plato began to challenge the paradox dialectical method of education upon examining it, â€Å"if one knows nothing, then how will one come to recognize knowledge when he or she encounters it? † The Socrates of Plato came to a different conclusion. The Socrates began to use a slave boy and demonstrate through geometry lessons that every individual acquires even the smallest amount of knowledge, and the knowledge serves as a window into the individual’s eternal and omniscient soul. By communicating with the slave the teacher could contest the student’s false opinions until he came to a true opinion that withstood severities of critical examination. Although the individual’s soul is the warehouse of the knowledge each individual must learn how to access the knowledge and recall it. Plato began to dwindle from the Sophists by Plato distanced himself further from Sophists by separating knowledge from opinions. The scientific method came around after the introduction from Aristotle. The scientific method is the development and explanation of rules for scientific investigation and reasoning that is not clear-cut. The scientific method is a hot topic for many severe and frequent debates throughout the science’s history. Many of the natural philosophers and scientists argue for the primary of a single approach that will establish scientific knowledge. Many debates that surround the scientific method is centered on rationalism. Empiricism is the main component of scientific tradition according to Aristotle. Aristotle felt that individual can gain the knowledge of universal truth through particular things such as induction. In some measures Aristotle brings together abstract thought with observations. Aristotelian science is not empirical in form, and many individuals commonly mistake this implication. Aristotle denies that individuals develop knowledge through induction and possesses the ability to be considered scientific knowledge. The main preliminary to scientific business enquiry is induction, this provides the preliminary grounds for scientific demonstrations. The main job of philosophers was to examine and discover the truths causes and to demonstrate universal truths. Even though induction was satisfactory for discovering universals by simplification, it lacked the ability to successfully identify the causes. Aristotle sought after identifying the causes and began using deductive reasoning in the form of syllogisms. Using the syllogisms, scientists possessed the capability of inferring new universal truths from ones that have previously been established by other philosophers. Personally upon learning about these different philosophers. I think the different inquiry processes empowered each philosopher to think out of the realm of normality and not except the norm which enabled Greece and even other cultures to answer questions and in turn gain more knowledge. 3. How are philosophical opinions justified? Epistemology contains the theory of justification and struggles to nderstand justifications of proposals and beliefs. Philosophical opinions are justified because of epistemology, which is associated to philosophies including justification, beliefs, and truths. Epistemology deals with the means of the production of knowledge. According to Plato, justification is the final component of knowledge and without it individuals only have a true opinion. Belief is a state of mind on which an individual can often fickle and liable to change. Justification is the factual rationalization of true opinions, reality is the thing that grounds it (Baker, 2013). Justification based theories of knowledge are categorized into two subsections, irrationalism and panrationalism. Irrationalism is something that draws to irrational principles and authorities, including an individual’s feelings. Panrationalism is rational criteria and principles including reasoning and observation. I believe that philosophical opinions are justified in various ways. Philosophical opinions not necessarily justified but are guided by personal experiences and religious beliefs. When beliefs are justified there is always a justifier or something that justifies the belief. Different things can be justifiers for example the following three items are suggested, the first is solely beliefs, beliefs that are together with other cognizant mental states, and finally beliefs, cognizant mental states, and other realities about individuals and his or her surrounding and the environment, which individuals may or may not possess the access to. As with every philosophical ideas there is criticism following the theory of justification. Held by critical rationalists W. W.  Bartley, David Miller, and Karl Popper, non-justificational criticism is the major opposition that is against this theory. Criticism to the justificationism is trying to prove that the claims lack the ability to be reduced to the influence or criteria that it influences appeals to, it states that justification is a primary claim and the claim itself is secondary. Nonjustificational criticism strives to attack the claims themselves. The first being guided by personal experience is because individuals tend to associate his or her philosophy on the basis of experiences they have encountered. An example that one can contribute to this is old policies that an individual has seen work effectively and as a result an opinion or philosophy is developed believing that it is the only way or best way because it worked for the individual. Another way philosophical opinions are justified is through religious orientation and is believed to be the most significant majority of the time. From birth individuals are drilled about right and wrong according to his or her religious views. Religious orientation affects an individual in all philosophical areas. Some include what to eat, creation and what is acceptable or not and because it is based on faith instead of facts, religion really shapes and individuals life because it effects ones choices in life. I think that justifying an individual’s ethical and moral beliefs is unnecessary, I think that individuals are entitled to believe and have certain opinions on what they choose. If these individuals try to justify his or her moral beliefs then they are clarifying an issue and answering a question.