HANDOUTS FOR PHILOSOPHY 11

2nd Semester – 1st Quarter Exam

LESSON 1: A Quest to Wonder: Introduction and History of

Philosophy of Human Person
Human beings want to understand the world and to know the truth for there are so many
things we have not figure out. We wonder about the things that puzzle us. Plato claimed that,
philosophy begins in WONDER. Wonder is the beginning for it stimulates us to venture into
philosophy. It is beyond mere curiosity as curiosity is usually directed to a single, fleeting, and
momentary object that captures interest. Our wonder here is directed toward analogy and the
relationships of things. We are more concerned on the things beyond mere information and which
lead us to more enduring question.

What is Philosophy?

The etymology of the term “Philosophy” in Greek (Philo as Love and Sophia as Wisdom)
is equivalent to “love of wisdom”, thus, we can consider Philosophers as Lovers of Wisdom.

They engaged in Philosophy because their goal is to become wise. To be wise is to know
the Truth and to be able to distinguish true from falsity and opinion. It means that Philosophers are
not swayed by popular views and are not easily deceived they rely on their own reasoning to seek
for the truth that others simply ignore.

Aristotle describe “Wisdom” in two Kinds – theoretical and practical. To possess theoretical
wisdom is to know necessary truths and their logical consequences. In contrast, practical wisdom
deals with knowledge in the realm of action. These two are both desirable and valuable. They
complement with each other to arrive certain truth and wisdom.

Therefore, Philosophy doesn’t only create theories in the mind but resolved issues by
seeking the right action through reason.

However, the Philosophical Enterprise doesn’t offer definite answer to our question, but it
leads us to a wider horizon of thinking possibilities to arrive to a best sort of answer. Our attempts
to seek the Truth provide us with opportunities to arrive at the best possible solution.

Philosophical Thought in Three Views

In the History of Man’s Search for Answers to Philosophical questions, three views are
dominant the Cosmo-centric, Theocentric and Anthropocentric views. Periods in the history of
Philosophy may be distinguished from one another by these views. Not only do these views reveal
the development of philosophical thought of the time but also reflect the dialectics that we defined.

Cosmo-centric View (Ancient Philosophers)

- The primary Questions of this thinkers are; 1. What is the basic stuff of the world?
(World-Composition) 2. How the World Arises? (World-Process) 3. What is the Principle
of World Order? (Order)
1. THALES – The ancient Greek philosopher Thales was born in Miletus in Greek Ionia. Aristotle, the
major source for Thales’s philosophy and science, identified Thales as the first person to investigate the
basic principles, the question of the originating substances of matter and, therefore, as the founder of the
school of natural philosophy.

- He claims that the Primary Principle of all things is “WATER.”

2. ANAXIMANDER – Anaximander was the author of the first surviving lines of Western philosophy. He
speculated and argued about “the Boundless” as the origin of all that is. He also worked on the fields of what
we now call geography and biology. Moreover, Anaximander was the first speculative astronomer. He
originated the world-picture of the open universe, which replaced the closed universe of the celestial vault.

- He claims that the Primary Principle of all things is “Apeiron.” (Boundless/Limitless)

Apeiron - Anaximander postulated eternal motion, along with the apeiron, as the originating cause of the
world. This (probably rotary) motion caused opposites, such as hot and cold.

3. ANAXIMENES – According to the surviving sources on his life, Anaximenes flourished in the mid-6th
century B.C.E. and died about 528. He is the third philosopher of the Milesian School of philosophy, so
named because like Thales and Anaximander, Anaximenes was an inhabitant of Miletus, in Ionia (ancient
Greece).

- He claims that the Primary Principle of all things is “Air.”

4. PYTHAGORAS – a Greek philosopher, mathematician, and founder of the Pythagorean brotherhood

that, although religious in nature, formulated principles that influenced by the thought
of Plato and Aristotle and contributed to the development of mathematics and Western rational philosophy.

- He claims that the Principle of Order, Causes and Effects are “NUMBERS.”
- He also develops “Pythagorean Theorem” which explains not only but also how the world was perfectly
balance.

5. HERACLITUS – a Greek philosopher remembered for his cosmology, in which “FIRE” or “LOGOS”
forms the basic material principle of an orderly universe. Little is known about his life, and the one book he
apparently wrote is lost.

- Because of this “Logos” all things comes from being and all is subject to “CHANGE.”
- For Heraclitus “nothing in this world is constant except CHANGE.”
- His famous words are “You Cannot Cross the River Twice.”

6. PARMENIDES – a Greek philosopher of Elea in southern Italy who founded Eleaticism, one of the
leading pre-Socratic schools of Greek thought. His general teaching has been diligently reconstructed from
the few surviving fragments of his principal work, a lengthy three-part verse composition titled On Nature.

Parmenides held that the multiplicity of existing things, their changing forms and motion,
are but an appearance of a single eternal reality (“Being”), thus giving rise to the Parmenidean
principle that “all is ONE.” From this concept of being, he went on to say that all claims of change
or of non-Being are illogical.

- For Parmenides “CHANGE is an Illusion.” And all things comes from “ONE.”
- Nothing in this world is changing only partiality of our experience of the “ONE.”
Theocentric View (Medieval Philosophers)
- The concern of this philosophers is to prove that God Exist!

1. AUGUSTINE – His greatest work is called The City of God. The book was in response to allegations
that Christianity brought about the decline of Rome and is considered one of Augustine's most important
works, standing alongside The Confessions, The Enchiridion, On Christian Doctrine, and On the Trinity. As
a work of one of the most influential Church Fathers, The City of God is a cornerstone of Western thought,
expounding on many questions of theology, such as the suffering of the righteous, the existence of evil, the
conflict between free will and divine omniscience, and the doctrine of original sin.
The book presents human history as a conflict between what Augustine calls the Earthly City (often
colloquially referred to as the City of Man, but never by Augustine) and the City of God, a conflict that is
destined to end in victory for the latter. The City of God is marked by people who forgo earthly pleasure to
dedicate themselves to the eternal truths of God, now revealed fully in the Christian faith. The Earthly
City, on the other hand, consists of people who have immersed themselves in the cares and pleasures of
the present, passing world.

2. THOMAS AQUINAS – was an Italian Dominican priest of the medieval Catholic Church. The name
“Aquinas” is not a surname, but rather a name given to him by virtue of his place of origin. Born in A.D.
1225, Thomas would grow to become one of the foremost theologians in pre-Reformation Europe. Thomas
was a prolific proponent of natural theology and was immensely influential in western thought.
Thomas Aquinas’s five Proofs of the Existence of God
Building on the logic of legendary philosopher Aristotle, Thomas Aquinas outlined compelling reasons for
people to embrace the existence of God. Thomas Aquinas’s arguments for God consisted of:
1. Argument from Motion
There is motion in the universe. Since nothing can move itself, an external agent or force is/was
necessary to cause or instigate the motion that is in the universe.
Embracing Aristotle’s reasoning, Thomas Aquinas dismissed the possibility of an infinite regress of
forces. There must be (in the words of Aristotle) an “unmoved mover.”
2. Argument from Cause
Based on the premises that every effect has a cause and that everything that begins to exist or happen
is an effect, the cosmological argument holds that there must be an ultimate First Cause.
After all, an infinite regress of effects is nonsensical. An original cause had to start the train of
effects.
3. Argument from Perfection
The universe contains a pyramid of beings (from simple, basic organisms to advanced organisms
such as humans). This “ever-increasing degree of perfection” points toward a final being that must be
perfect and ideal.
4. Argument from Design
The world contains an observable order or design. Such design cannot be attributed to the object or
objects in question. There must be an external Designer to account for the complexity of life and the order of
the universe.

5. Argument from Necessity

 Everything that exists does so in relation to other things. Within this observed network of
relationships, everything that exists is dependent on something else. However, an infinite regress of such
relationships is contradictory and impossible. There must be a “necessary being” which is contingent on
nothing else for its existence.

Anthropocentric View (Modern Philosophers)

1. JOHN LOCKE – an English philosopher whose works lie at the foundation of modern
philosophical empiricism and political liberalism. He was an inspirer of both the
European Enlightenment and the Constitution of the United States. His philosophical thinking was close to
that of the founders of modern science, especially Robert Boyle, Sir Isaac Newton, and other members of
the Royal Society. His political thought was grounded in the notion of a social contract between citizens and
in the importance of toleration, especially in matters of religion. Much of what he advocated in the realm of
politics was accepted in England after the Glorious Revolution of 1688–89 and in the United States after the
country’s declaration of independence in 1776.

- For Locke, knowledge comes from “EXPERIENCES” and our mind is like an “EMPTY SLATE”
during our Birth. Therefore, the only access for truth and knowledge is by way of “Experiences and
Education.”

2. RENE DESCARTES – a French mathematician, scientist, and philosopher. Because he was one of the
first to abandon Scholastic Aristotelianism, because he formulated the first modern version of mind-body
dualism, from which stems the mind-body problem, and because he promoted the development of a new
science grounded in observation and experiment, he is generally regarded as the founder of
modern philosophy. Applying an original system of METHODICAL DOUBT, he dismissed apparent
knowledge derived from authority, the senses, and reason and erected new epistemic foundations on the
basis of the intuition that, when he is thinking, he exists; this he expressed in the dictum “I think,
therefore I am” (best known in its Latin formulation, “COGITO, ERGO SUM,”). He developed
Descartes’s metaphysics is rationalist, based on the postulation of innate ideas of mind, matter, and God, but
his physics and physiology, based on sensory experience, are mechanistic and empiricist.

- For Descartes, knowledge comes from “INNATE IDEAS OF THE MIND.”

3. IMMANUEL KANT – a German philosopher whose comprehensive and systematic work

in epistemology (the theory of knowledge), ethics, and aesthetics greatly influenced all
subsequent philosophy, especially the various schools of Kantianism and idealism.

Kant was one of the foremost thinkers of the Enlightenment and arguably one of the
greatest philosophers of all time. In him were subsumed new trends that had begun with
the rationalism (stressing reason) of René Descartes and the empiricism (stressing experience)
of Francis Bacon. He thus inaugurated a new era in the development of philosophical thought.

- For Kant, knowledge comes from both “Experiences and Reason.” He called it as Synthetic Knowledge.
 LESSON 2: Value of Philosophical Reflection

SOCRATES (470BCE-399BCE)

- An Ancient Greek philosopher whose way of life, character, and thought exerted a profound
influence on Western philosophy.
- Socrates was a widely recognized and controversial figure in his native Athens, so much so
that he was frequently mocked in the plays of comic dramatists. Although Socrates himself
wrote nothing, he is depicted in conversation in compositions by a small circle of his
admirers—Plato and Xenophon first among them.
- He is portrayed in these works as a man of great insight, integrity, self-mastery, and
argumentative skill. The impact of his life was all the greater because of the way in which it
ended: at age 70, he was brought to trial on a charge of impiety and sentenced to death by
poisoning (the poison probably being hemlock) by a jury of his fellow citizens.
- Plato’s Apology of Socrates purports to be the speech Socrates gave at his trial in response
to the accusations made against him (Greek apologia means “defense”). Its powerful
advocacy of the examined life and its condemnation of Athenian democracy have made it
one of the central documents of Western thought and culture.

Philosophical Reflection (Knowing Thyself)

 Socrates assert that Philosophical Reflection is necessary in the life of every person.

 His pronouncements of “know thyself” and the “the unexamined life is not worth living” are
to be understood this way.

 He philosophized where people usually gathered (agora in Greek) and compelled those he
conversed with to think, to defend their views, to account for what they know and do not
know. This series of questioning and answering that Socrates developed in engaging in
philosophical reflection came to be known as the Socratic Method. This method is an
effective Method of Education that is valued even to this time. Thus, Socrates provides us a
valuable legacy which was worth sharing to others.
 Socratic Method

  Thus, a life worth living is a life that

examines what one thinks. An examination of
beliefs or thoughts provides us with opportunity
to know ourselves better. Philosophical
Reflection is indispensable because we do not
realize what we truly believe in until we are challenged to defend them.
 Therefore, the value of philosophy is evidently practical. It has a direct relation to the quality of our life.
We venture to discover truths about ourselves and to improve by our discoveries. We can obviously
choose to ignore the questions that require philosophical reflection, but that is not the way to live a life that
befits humans. The unexamined life would not be a good life.

Philosophical Reflection (Knowing Thyself)

The word “Pilosopo” or “Filisopo” is not an original Filipino word. It has come down
to us through the Spanish “Filosofo,” which has Latin and Greek roots. So our locally adopted
word for Philosophy finds its affinity to its Greek etymology. It is an acceptable word as our
equivalent Filipino word for Philosophy. But in our Philippine society this notion of “Pilosopo”
understood having a negative meaning.

Contrary to the idea of Lover of Wisdom, “Pilisopo” refers to someone who

reasons poorly. Oftentimes, the “Pilosopo’s” faulty reasoning is even found entertaining. But in
the deeper sense, it possess a danger to Philosophy because of its erroneous kind of reasoning it
was call Fallacies. This Fallacies mislead arguments through language or some irrelevant issues
outside the focus argument.

Now let us look another meaning of the term “Pilosopo.” In Rizal’s Novel Noli Me
Tangere, we find the character “Pilosopo Tasyo.” The Pilosopo in this sense is a Social Critic.
Pilosopo Tasyo is like Socrates who bluntly express their views on the Social and Political
Tragedy in their own time. Indeed, these people are rare. They are not the same with others who
merely accept the comfort of the status quo. Pilosopo Tasyo and Socrates only seek for Wisdom
of their own time.

Therefore, the Philosopher or Pilosopo observes, sees clearly, and speaks for the
Truth. Our World needs people who speak the truth and help in making necessary reforms so we
can all have a better future. We need Pilosopo to engage others to find the Truth and to live by it.

LESSON 3: Journey to Truth: Doxa and Episteme

Why we SEEK TRUTH?

It is always in our nature to find truth and meaning.

We maybe finite being but we are destined and drawn
toward that those beyond us. We are puzzled by quest for
perfection, beauty and immortality. We seek to surpass our
limits because we have a power to do so through the use of
our intellect and reason. Therefore, we seek TRUTH to
better understand our self and also things around us.

ANCIENT ROOTS OF TRUTH (OBJECTIVE TRUTH)

PLATO (428-424BC)

TRUTH for Plato,

“Not all things we see are True, unless it is

verified and justified.”

- Knowledge as Certain
- Opinion as Uncertain

Knowledge and Truth primarily accessible

only by gods and intelligent beings.

ARISTOTLE (384-322BC)

TRUTH for Aristotle,

“TRUTH is a SOUND and

VALID ARGUMENT”

He uses Syllogism (a
deductive argumentative
technique which compose
of a conclusion inferred from two premises)

Valid arguments are those that begin with premises that are knowable and guarantee the TRUTH
of the Conclusion.
The premises serves as explanation why the conclusion is valid and acceptable.

All men are Mortal.

Socrates is a Man.
Therefore, Socrates is Mortal.

MODERN LEGACY (Methodical Doubt)

RENE DESCARTES (1596-1650)

“Anything that are false, doubtable, or uncertain, cannot be used as basis of knowledge.”
- First Meditation

The Meditations uses the method of doubt as test to distinguish the indubitable from dubitable.

Opinions are those that can be doubted and are often confused in our thought.

Knowledge are undoubtable (Self, Existence and Reason)

CONTEMPORARY LEGACY (Methodical Doubt)

Jean Jacques Derrida

- He is part of Postmodernist thinkers which denies the NOTION OF OBJECTIVE REALITY.

“TRUTH is just a mere conceptual construct.”

There is no single objective Truth, but are many truths

that are particulars.

He developed DECONSTRUCTION which

challenged traditional views in Philosophy by looking at
structure of language to open up limitless interpretation.

Knowledge is no longer viewed as necessary

validation of Truth.

However, the relativism of contemporary period

due to everything being permissible requires much
thought.

Many students nowadays tend to think that beliefs do not need to be justified. Many of them
claim that “what is true for you, may not be true for me.” To think this way is dangerous and
irresponsible. It is the same as arguing that one in entitled to his/her opinion or interpretation and
so there is no room for discussion.

Your Goal as students, is to find a way to validate the “Objective Truth” of the situation and
analyze the “subjective truths/opinion” presented to you by the situation.

To think critically is not only for Philosophers but also for people who wants to live in
TRUTH using their Reason.

LESSON 4: ERROR IN REASONING (FALLACIES) and TRUTH

CLAIMS
 Fallacies – Statements that are incorrect and faulty. They were generally used in
persuasion and deception.

Attacking the Person Fallacies

1. Ad Hominem – attacking a person or their character rather than making a claim based on
reasoning. The attack include name-calling, labelling, and being offensive and show little intelligent
thought.

2. Ad Ignorantiam – relying a person’s or group of people’s ignorance to make a claim;

misleading a person or group by appealing to their lack of knowledge in a particular topic.

3. Appeal to Tradition (Bandwagon) – Using tradition or cultural belief to suggest that something
is true or accurate; suggesting that, because something has long been done a certain way, it must
be the correct way.

4. Ad Baculum – Making an argument by inciting fear or Making Threats.

5. Ad Populum – Attempting to sway popular support by appealing to sentiments and weakness

rather than facts and reason.

6. Anecdote – Using personal or isolated experience as compelling and worthwhile evidence;

suggesting that a personal or unique experience can be applied to other circumstances.

7. Appeal to Consequences – concluding that a premise is either true or false based on what
consequence of that premise would be.

Misdirecting Fallacies

8. Non Sequitur – Making a conclusion that does not follow from previously established premises
or conclusion.

9. Loaded Question – asking question that, if answered will imply a shared agreement, forcing a
person to agree to an assumption by them answering a question.

10. Straw Man – concocting a false or made up scenario and then attacking that scenario in order
to make the opponent bad.

11. Red Herring – diverting attention by changing the subject.

12. Begging the Question – Making a claim that uses an implied assumption; raises a question
by assuming an answer or shared belief.
13. Tu Quoque – Avoiding engagement with another’s argument by arguing something unrelated
in return.
14. Reification – Treating abstract or hypothetical things or ideas as concrete realities;
personifying abstractions.

Data Manipulation Fallacies

15. Black and White – suggesting only two alternative conclusions exist when, in reality, several
options exists.
16. Cherry-Picking – picking a particular data set of facts while ignoring others in order to make
an argument that suits a particular purpose.
17. Slippery Slope – arguing that change and procedure, law, or action that will create a domino-
effect of adverse consequences; suggesting that if one thing happens, a series of things will
inevitably happen.
18. Proving Non-Existence – Instead of proving something to exist or be true, an arguer asks
his/her opponent to provide that it doesn’t exist; proving real by suggesting the opposite can’t be
proven.
19. Small Numbers Statistics – Using an instance of small fraction of the population to make an
argument for greater population.
20. Misunderstanding Statistics – Making strange or erroneous claims about a particular idea by
using statistics.

LESSON 5: TRUTH CLAIMS IN LANGUAGE (A

HERMENEUTICAL ANALYSIS)

In Philosophy, we highlight the different approach in dealing and Identifying Philosophical Truths.
Now, we will focus our discussion on LANGUAGE which plays an important role in our
everyday activities.

Philosophy claims that Thoughts are related to LANGUAGE and its INTERPRETATION.

In this part, we will see the LANGUAGE as complicated one in a reflective analysis. It is
because LANGUAGE is subject to interpretation, and communication. The philosopher’s role
is to distinguish the right and holistic hermeneutical categories involved in the Text.

What is Hermeneutics?

 Hermeneutics is about one’s capability for making linguistic communication understandable.

 Hermeneutics is at work more in the trying to make a decision on practical Questions.
 Philosophical Hermeneutics is a hermeneutical reflection which is in the service of: Skillful
understanding and explication, and convincing and persuading.

2 Essential Characteristic of Language

1. Communication – it is vital in studying language, since it is the way to make the language
understandable.
2. Interpretation – it is the human ability to understand a certain text and create a meaning based
on facts about it.

Language Philosophers (Hermeneutical Role)

1. Friedrich D. E. Schleiermacher (thoughts and Language are identical)

- He claims that our thoughts and language are identically similar in the process of communication
and interpretation. He believe that by language we can communicate our thoughts and objectify it.

2. Wilhem Dilthey and Ludwig Wittgenstein (History plays an important role in understanding
the Text)
WORLD
- They both claims that Historical background and Origin of the text are necessary in the
interpretation of Language. BEHIND
- Ludwig Wittgenstein claims that “the limit of my language is the limit of my world.”
THE TEXT
3. Rudolf Karl Bultmann (Demystification)

- He focus his study on the interpretation of bible. He tries to deny all of the miraculous
interpretation in the story of Jesus in the bible. He demystified the idea of the person of Jesus in
order to see him as a regular human being. But in the process he cannot deny the fact that
miracles and wonders are inseparable to Jesus.

4. Hans-Georg Gadamer (Subjectivity of interpretation)

- He claims that the very issue of language is the diversity of interpretation. People have liberty to
understand the text and interpret a certain text whatever they want.

5. Jurgen Habermas (Communicative Action)

-He claims that as long as the language is understandable and communicable it can conveys
knowledge and truth.

Paul Ricoeur’s Three Worlds of Interpretation

- In understanding the text, we should consider 3 areas wherein the language meet its totality
of meaning.

 The World behind the TEXT (HISTORY) - This aspect gives us the idea of the history,
origin and transcription of the Text.

 The World Inside the TEXT (The Text itself) – This area speaks about the text per se
which means literal text analysis.

 The World In front the TEXT (interpretation/contextualization) – This area express that
interpretation should consider also contextualization in understanding all the concepts to be

The Three Worlds of Interpretation

 HISTORY

KNOWLEDGE
and
WORLD TRUTH WORLD IN
INSIDE THE FRONT OF
TEXT THE TEXT
TEXT INTERPRETATION/
CONTEXTUALIZATION

PREPARED BY:
MR. SHERWIN D. CAMPOREDONDO
Christian Living 7 Teacher