I need you to answer this philosophy test, look over the notes befor answerringCritical Thinking Test 2
The Web of Belief, Chapters III, VI, IX; lecture notes
Grading scale: 15–13=A; 12—11=B; 10—9=C; 8—7=D; 6—0=F
Instructions: Answer the following T/F
The following statements refer to The Web of Belief
The following statements refer to lecture notes.
1. The testimony of authorities is the best evidence one
can have for holding a belief.
12.“Okham’s razor” assumes that causation/explanation
is as efficient as possible.
2. “The cat is on my mat” counts as an observation
statement.
13. Science requires of all its beliefs that there be some
way, in principle, to falsify them.
3. Observation statements describe observations in a way
with which all or most other observers are bound to agree.
14. Observations taken to be evidence for a belief must
be observable by just about anyone.
4. The author agrees that the differences between our
observations counts as evidence for the view that truth is
relative to the believer.
15. Testimony taken as evidence for a belief need not
have originated with someone’s direct observation.
5. A hypothesis is a statement, which, if true, would explain
observations for which the hypothesis was proposed.
6. The evidence for the truth of a hypothesis lies in its being
predictive of the same kinds of observations that it was
formulated to explain.
7. The virtue, “conservatism” favors hypotheses that
conflict with the fewest already-held beliefs.
8. One version of the virtue, “modesty” recommends the
more extraordinary of two competing hypotheses.
9. An ad hoc hypothesis would more probably be offered
in defense of a true—rather than a false— hypothesis.
10. An explanation of a physical occurrence is an account
of its cause(s).
11. Physicists account for all causation with reference to a
few elementary, physical forces.
1
CRITICAL THINKING TEST 2 NOTES
Science
I.
Def: “Science” is a world view consisting of six
fundamental assumptions, a seven step method for the
construction and maintenance of a rational belief
system concerning the natural world, and the practical
application of that belief system.
A. Six fundamental assumptions:
1. Physicalism—reality is made of matter and/or
energy.
2. Empiricism—The best evidence one can have
for correct belief is one’s own direct
observations via the five senses, or those
devices that extend or enhance sense
perception*.
3. Universal Causation—Every physical event is
the necessary effect of antecedent, sufficient
cause(s)*.
—Q: What reason do we have for believing
the PUC?
a. Explanation
b. Manipulation
c. The impossibility of even imagining an
uncaused event.
4. Okham’s Razor (William of Okham)—The most
efficient of competing explanations is to be
favored over the others.
1
CRITICAL THINKING TEST 2 NOTES
5. Falsification (refutability)—No statement is to
be believed true if there is not some way, in
principle, to falsify it.
6. Mathematization
of
Nature—Reality
expressible in mathematical terms.
is
B. Seven Step Scientific Method (from Galileo):
1. Identify a problem (pose a question).
2. Formulate a preliminary hypothesis.
3. Collect additional
observations)
facts.
(make
further
4. Formulate a revised hypothesis.
5. Infer the consequences of the hypothesis’
truth.
6. Test the hypothesis.
7. Apply the theory.
2
CRITICAL THINKING TEST 2 NOTES
Chapter VI Hypothesis
An outline
I.
Hypothesis
A. def. A “Hypothesis” is a statement/belief which, if
true, would explain observations already believed
true. Ex., There is a mouse in the house. Hypotheses
describe what either has not yet been observed (the
mouse) or what cannot be observed (atoms.) In
science, verified hypotheses become “theories,”
which become “facts” when they are so firmly
established that their being overturned by contrary
evidence is improbable. Hypotheses serve two
purposes: to explain the past, and predict the future.
Their truth is verified by their ability to predict, which
may be understood with reference to the pragmatic
theory of truth.
II.
The Virtues of Hypotheses (evaluation of competing
hypotheses).
A. Conservatism recommends the hypothesis that
conflicts with the fewest, already-held beliefs.
Conservatism can be understood with reference to
the coherence theory of truth.
B. Modesty recommends a hypothesis in two ways: First,
Modesty recommends a single, or the fewest joint
hypotheses over joint hypotheses that would explain
the same observations. This can be understood with
reference to Okham’s razor. Second, Modesty
recommends
the
more
mundane—the
less
extraordinary—of competing hypotheses. This can
be understood with reference to the great degree to
which science and its world view has explained the
3
CRITICAL THINKING TEST 2 NOTES
natural world and perhaps the coherence theory of
truth.
C. Simplicity recommends a hypothesis that averages
out, statistically, anomalous observations of similar
events. This can be understood with reference to the
intricacy of causation, and the difficulty of isolating
specific causal sequences from the vast web of
causation and the mathematization of nature.
D. Generality recommends a hypothesis whose
explanation of similar observations is universalized as
a law of nature. This can be understood with
reference to the Principle of Universal Causation.
E. Refutability is the converse of conservatism.
Refutability recommends a hypothesis whose
falsification would conflict with the most alreadyheld beliefs. Refutability also rejects a hypothesis that
cannot, in principle, be falsified. Refutability can be
understood in terms of the coherence theory of
truth, the scientific assumption of falsifiability, and the
coherence theory of truth.
III. Ad hoc hypotheses
A. Def: An ad hoc hypothesis is one formulated to save a
hypothesis that has failed to predict. The addition of ad
hoc hypotheses to an original hypothesis sacrifices the
virtues of simplicity and refutability dooms the original
hypothesis to rejection.
4
CRITICAL THINKING TEST 2 NOTES
Causation
I.
(def.) “Causation”—cause and effect—is a temporal
sequence of physical events, related in terms of
sufficiency and necessity, e.g., falling dominoes, and
affirmed by statistical frequency of occurrence greater
than that observed in a control group.*
A. (def.) p→q Where “p” is a “sufficient cause” of “q” if
whenever p occurs, then q must occur. (note the
operational definition)
B. (def.) p→q Where “q” is a “necessary cause” of “p”
if whenever q does not occur, then p cannot occur.
II.
Exercise: Consider the following physical events/states
of affairs. How are they related, in terms of sufficiency*
and necessity*:
A. The presence of atmospheric oxygen and the
presence of human life
B. A car’s engine running and fuel in the tank
C. Smoking tobacco and the occurrence of lung
cancer
III.
Problem: A single cause may be both necessary and
sufficient for a given effect but, normally, the sufficient
cause for a given effect is the sum of many necessary
causes (e.g., the sufficient cause of a car’s engine
running). Of course, there may be some number of
5
CRITICAL THINKING TEST 2 NOTES
causes, equally sufficient for a given effect (e.g., the
sufficient causes of cancer). In addition, only the events
in a causal sequence are subject to observation—not
causation itself. That, along with the difficulty in
distinguishing truly causal sequences from merely
coincidental sequences, means that “one’s own direct
observation” is often inadequate evidence for beliefs
about causes (consider, e.g., homeopathic “cures”).
IV.
Solution: The definitions of “evidence,” “causation,”
“sufficiency,” and “necessity,” suggest a means of
distinguishing
causal
sequences
from
merely
coincidental sequences. What is it?
Causation, Coincidence, and Luck
I. Def.: “Coincidence” is the unusual or unlikely proximate
occurrence of events that may or may not be causally related.
“Luck” is coincidence judged to be favorable (“good luck”) or
unfavorable (“bad luck”) to oneself or others.
Note: The more unusual, unlikely, favorable, or unfavorable a
coincidence, the more likely uncritical people are to attribute it
to luck.
What is a possible explanation for the belief in luck?
6
CRITICAL THINKING TEST 2 NOTES
I.
Evidence:
A. Consider the relation of the following statements in
constructing an adequate definition of “evidence.”
1. Food left out has been nibbled.
2. “Scurrying” sounds are heard at night.
3. A mouse is in the house.
4. The begonias are blooming.
5. A hole has been made in the baseboard.
B. “Evidence” is a statement/observation
causally related to belief.
that
is
1. As the only appropriate cause of belief
formation
2. The state of affairs described by the belief
statement is the cause of the state of affairs
described by the evidential statement(s).*
7
CRITICAL THINKING TEST 2 NOTES
C. The following rules will narrow the extension of
“evidence,” making it more precise.
1. Evidence must, ultimately, have been directly
observed
2. Evidence must be publicly observable
3. Its observation must be repeatable*
4. Its observation
circumstances
must
not
require
special
5. Its causal relation to belief must be testable
(see “causation”)
8
CRITICAL THINKING TEST 2 NOTES
Evaluating deductive, propositional reasoning
modus ponens
P1.
p→ q
P2.
p
C.
.: q
Premise 1: Where p is evidence regarded as sufficient for believing q to be
true.
Premise 2: Where p is the assertion of p’s truth.
Conclusion: Where q is the demonstration of q’s truth.
I.
Refuting modus ponens reasoning:
A. Argue that evidence p is not true:
~p (not p)
B. Argue that evidence p is not sufficient for the truth of q:
p . ~q
Note that modus ponens and the refutation of the claim of sufficiency rely
on the definition of “sufficient.”
9
CRITICAL THINKING TEST 2 NOTES
modus tollens (note philosophical problems regarding rational grounds
for disbelief.)
P1.
p→ q
P2.
~q
C.
.: ~p
Premise 1: Where evidence q is regarded as necessary for the truth of p.
Premise 2: Where ~q is the assertion that q is false.
Conclusion: Where ~p is the demonstration of p’s falsehood.
II.
Refuting modus tollens reasoning:
A. Argue that evidence q is not false (that q is true).
~ ~q –or—q by double negation
B. Argue that evidence q is not necessary for the truth of p.
p . ~q
Note that modus tollens and the refutation of the claim of necessity rely
on the definition of “necessary.”
10
CRITICAL THINKING TEST 2 NOTES
III.
Identify the argument procedures in the following:
A. If some physical evidence—like a skeleton—of the Loch Ness
monster is found, then the Loch Ness monster must exist. I read on
the internet that the skeleton of a plesiosaur, which animal many
believe the Loch Ness monster to be, was recently discovered near
the Loch. Therefore the Loch Ness monster must exist.
B. It is not true that the Loch lacks a supply of large prey animals. A
more recent study has concluded that salmon and seals enter and
exit the Loch from time to time. They were simply not in the Loch at
the time of the previous study.
C. A plesiosaur skeleton was not found near the Loch; I read that
scientists have concluded that the skeleton is a hoax.
D. It is true that there is not enough biomass in the Loch to support a
family of monsters. However, eyewitnesses have reported seeing
the monster on the banks of the Loch. The monster could be
foraging for food on land.
E. The skeleton of a plesiosaur was indeed found near the Loch. But
the skeleton is millions of years old and fossilized. Just because
plesiosaurs once roamed the Loch does not mean that they do
today.
F. If the Loch Ness monster exists then there would have to be a supply
of large prey animals in the Loch to support a breeding population
of monsters. A recent survey of the Loch’s biomass concluded that
there is not enough large prey animals to support a family of
monsters. Therefore the Loch Ness monster does not exist.
11
CRITICAL THINKING TEST 2 NOTES
Scientific Groups Disagree About Neanderthals’ Ability to Speak
Recent reports indicating that Neanderthals were able to speak were
wrong, researchers say. Scientists from Duke University reported in May
that a bony canal in the skulls of Neanderthals called the hypoglossal
canal—which carries the nerve complex required for speech—is as large
as that in modern humans, indicating a capacity for speech.
But a UC Berkeley team reported in Tuesday’s proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences that the hypoglossal canals of many primates—
which do not speak—are as large as those of humans. They conclude that
the size of the hypoglossal canal is not necessarily related to the ability to
speak.
–Compiled by Times medical writer
Thomas H. Maugh II
12
CRITICAL THINKING TEST 2 NOTES
Milk May Be the Carrier of Crohn’s
Causes: Some argue that the bug that may cause the disease is found in
dairy herds.
If, as some scientists are now convinced, Crohn’s disease is caused by a
microorganism, the question becomes: How is it transmitted?
The shocking answer, they say, is through that most sacrosanct of
beverages—milk. The microorganism under suspicion, Mycobacterium
avium subspecies paratuberculosis, or MAP, is common in U.S. dairy herds,
activists argue, and it is not killed by conventional pasteurization.
Transmission of MAP from infected cattle to humans through milk could
explain much about the occurrence of Crohn’s, including its
geographical distribution and rising incidence.
The purported spread of MAP through milk “constitutes a public health
disaster of tragic proportions,” said Dr. John Hermon-Taylor of St. George’s
Hospital Medical Center in London.
Both the U.S. dairy industry and the Food and Drug Administration argue
vehemently that the U.S. milk supply is safe and that pasteurization is
effective at removing any potential threats.
But several large milk distributors in Britain have already changed their
pasteurization procedures to make it more likely that the microorganism
will be killed. The suspected links between MAP, milk and Crohn’s have
received a great deal of attention in that country, but none in the United
States.
Some facts seem indisputable. MAP causes Johne’s disease in cattle, a
debilitating disorder whose symptoms are identical to those of Crohn’s in
humans. Large numbers of cattle in the United States are infected by the
organism.
According to a National Animal Health Monitoring System study
conducted in 1996, 22% of U.S. dairy herds have infected cows. The cows
secrete the mycobacterium in their milk.
And there the sides part company. The dairy industry argues that the link
between MAP and Crohn’s is unproved and that, even if there were a link.
Pasteurization kills the microorganism.
13
CRITICAL THINKING TEST 2 NOTES
“It is the position of the Food and Drug Administration that the latest
research shows conclusively that commercial pasteurization does indeed
eliminate this hazard,” said Joseph Smucker, the FDA’s milk safety team
leader, who wrote to activists concerned about the risk.
But the activists have compiled a growing dossier of evidence. Dr. Walter
Thayer of Rhode Island Hospital notes that Crohn’s is not distributed evenly
around the world, but is seen only in milk-drinking areas—Australia,
southern Africa, Europe, the United States, Canada and New Zealand. It is
rare in India, where they drink milk but boil it first.
Work by Hermon-Taylor and Dr. Irene Grant of Queen’s University in Belfast,
Ireland, has shown that DNA from MAP was present in about 20% of milk
samples collected throughout the country. Living bacteria could be
grown from many of the samples.
An as-yet-unpublished study by the Ministry of Agriculture in Britain found
that researchers could grow MAP from at least 3% of samples of
commercial pasteurized milk, Hermon-Taylor said. “It confirms, as sure as
God made little green apples, that retail milk in Britain is a definite source
of human exposure to these bugs,” he added.
MAP is extremely difficult to kill, and commercial pasteurization—which
involves heating milk to 161 degrees Fahrenheit for 15 seconds—is not
sufficient, according to studies by Grant. Heating to higher
temperatures—up to 194 degrees for the same period of time—is also not
effective, she said, but increasing the pasteurization time to 25 seconds,
even at 161 degrees, is.
Last year, several large milk distributors in Britain told their suppliers to
increase pasteurization time, and that has been accomplished. Activists
want to see the same steps taken here.
“There comes a point in time where consumer health takes precedence
over commercial concerns, says Karen Meyer, president of the
Paratuberculosis Awareness and Research Assn. “If a human pathogen is
entering the food chain, that is a major concern. We need to ensure the
protection of the public health.”
By Thomas H. Maugh II
Times Medical Writer
14
Purchase answer to see full
attachment