Chapter II.

METHODS OF PHILOSOPHIZING Week 2

Learning Competency 2.1 – 2.2
2.1 Distinguish opinion from truth.
2.2 Analyze situations that show the difference between opinion and truth

WHAT I KNOW?

Direction: Select the letter of the best answer. Write your answer on a
separate sheet of paper.
1. This is to think or express oneself in a philosophical manner.
A. Philosophy C. Rational thinking
B. Irrational thinking D. Philosophizing
2. In phenology truth is based on the person’s _____________.
A. Consciousness C. Exercising Choices
B. Personal Freedom D. All of these choices
3. What study states the truth is based in personal freedom?
A. Modernism B. Existentialism C. Logic D. Phenomenology
4. In ______, it is accepted that truth is not absolute.
A. Existentialism B. Cultural C. Modernism D. Postmodernism
5. Who used the word phenomenon to refer the world of lour experience?
A. Kant B. Solomon C. Husserl D. Higgins
6. Which is false about Husserl phenomenology?
A. Both the phenomenologist can distinguish the nature of consciousness and it is
the scientific study of the essential structures of consciousness
B. It is the scientific study of the essential structures of consciousness
C. Husserl’s phenomenology is the thesis that consciousness is intentional
D. All of the above
7. Who identifies the relationship between language and reality?
A. Tractatus B. Wittgenstein C. Kant D. Sartre
8. The limits of what can be said are defined by the logical rules.
A. Partly False B. False C. True D. Partly True
9. A _____ is a defect in an argument other than its having false premises .
A. Opinion B. Truth C. Fallacy D. Proposition
10. What is a presentation of reasons for a particular claim?
A. Proposition B. Premises C. Argument D. Fallacy
11. I really deserve an “A” on this paper, professor . Not only did I study during my
grandmother’s funeral , but I also passed up the heart transplant surgery , even though
that was the first matching donor in 3 years.
A. Equivocation B. Appeal to pity C. Appeal to force D. Division
12. Whatever has not been proved false must be true, and vice versa.
A. Begging the question C. Appeal to ignorance
B. Equivocation D. Divison
13. Thrilling books are very rare. Rare books are expensive . So thrilling books are
expensive.
A. Appeal to force C. Appeal to pity
B. Division D. Equivocation
 14. This infers that something is true of the whole from the fact that it is true of some part
of the whole.
A. Appeal to people C. Appeal to force
B. Appeal to ignorance D. Composition
15. Syllogism: Validity comes from a logical conclusion based on logically constructed
premises
A. Tru e B. False C. Partly True D. Partly False

WHAT IS IT?

Methods of Philosophizing

What is philosophizing?

Philosophizing is to think or express oneself in a philosophical manner. it considers or

discusses a (matter) from a philosophical standpoint.
In phenomenology, truth is based on the person's consciousness; while in existentialism,
truth is based in exercising choices and personal freedom; in postmodernism, it is
accepted that truth is not absolute, (i.e., cultural); and in logic, truth is based on reasoning
and critical thinking.

A. Phenomenology: On Consciousness
Who is Husserl?
Edmund Husserl founded phenomenology, which is essentially a philosophical method.
Phenomenology. This focuses on careful inspection and description of phenomena or
appearances, defined as any object of conscious experience, that is, that which we are
conscious of (Johnston 2006).
In Husserl's Logical Investigations, he argued against psychologism; the thesis that truth is
dependent on the peculiarities of the human mind, and that philosophy is reducible to
psychology.
The word “phenomenon” comes directly from the Greek, meaning “appearance.''

Immanuel Kant, German philosopher, had used the same word to refer to the world of
our experience. Phenomenology is the scientific study of the essential structures of
consciousness. By describing those structures, Husserl believes that we can find certainty
which philosophy has always sought.
Husserl’s phenomenology is the thesis that consciousness is intentional. Every act of
consciousness is directed at some object or another, possibly a material object or an
”ideal” object (e.g., mathematics).
The phenomenologist can distinguish and describe the nature of the intentional acts of
consciousness and the intentional objects of consciousness, which are defined through
the content of consciousness.

B. Existentialism: On Freedom
What is existentialism?
Existentialism is more of an outlook or attitude supported by diverse doctrines centered
on certain common themes.
These themes include:
 ° the human condition or the relation of the individual to the world;
 ° the human response to that condition;
  ° being, especially the difference between the being of person (which is “existence”)
and the being of other kinds of things;
 ° human freedom;
 ° the significance (and unavoidability) of choice and decision in the absence of
certainty and;
 ° the concreteness and subjectivity of life as lived, against abstractions and false
objectifications.
If we may generalize for just a moment, we might suggest that the existentialists share a
concern for the individual and personal responsibility (Chambers 2001).

Existentialism is often thought to be antireligious; nevertheless, there has been a strong

current of Christian existentialism, beginning with the 19th century Danish philosopher
Kierkegaard.
As the first existentialist, Kierkegaard insisted that the authentic self was the personally
chosen self, as opposed to public or ”herd” identity. Existentialism’s relationship to
phenomenology is a matter of some controversy. However, some philosophers, such as
Jean-Paul Sartre, have employed phenomenological methods to arrive at or support their
specific variations on existential themes.
Our search for truth by means of critical thinking is a rational choice. Existentialism, with
Sartre, a French philosopher, emphasizes the importance of free individual choice,
regardless of the power of other people to influence and coerce our desires, beliefs, and
decisions.
Sartre argued that consciousness (being-for-itself) is such that it is always free to choose
(though not free not to choose) and free to “negate" (or reject) the given features of the world.
One is never free of one’s "situation," Sartre tells us, but one is always free to ”negate”
that situation and to (try to) change it.
The notion of authenticity is not new. Socrates already concerned himself with the
authenticity of the self – the genuineness of his thoughts and actions, “the good of his
soul." He sought not mere opinions but knowledge, self-knowledge in particular, and
prescribed not just right action but virtue, being “true to oneself.” St Augustine was
concerned with the spiritual nature of the ”true" self as opposed to the inauthentic
demands of desire and the body. Jean-Jacques Rousseau was adamant about the
essential goodness of the “natural” self in contrast to the ''corruption'' imposed by society
(Baird & Kaufmann 1997).
C. Postmodernism: On Cultures
Postmodernism is not a philosophy. It is at best a holding pattern, perhaps a cry of
despair. It rightly talks about world philosophy, the philosophy of many cultures, but
such talk is not a philosophy either (Shields 2012).
For instance, reality cannot be known nor described objectively by postmodernists. The
American philosopher Richard Rorty, notably developing themes from pragmatism and
certain quarters of analytic philosophy and bringing these together with Continental
themes, challenged the modern rationalist presumption that philosophy or any branch of
knowledge can find secure foundations or achieve genuine representation of reality.
For instance, reality cannot be known nor described objectively by postmodernists.
Postmodernists believe that humanity should come at truth beyond the rational to the
non-rational elements of human nature, including the spiritual. Postmodernists consider
that to arrive at truth, humanity should realize the limits of reason and objectivism.
Beyond exalting individual analysis of truth, postmodernists adhere to a relational,
holistic approach. Moreover, postmodernists value our existence in the world and in
relation to it.
D. Analytic Tradition
'‘Can language objectively describe truth?’' For the philosophers of this tradition, language
cannot objectively describe truth.
For Ludwig Wittgenstein, an analytic philosopher, language is socially conditioned. We
understand the world solely in terms of our language games – that is, our linguistic, social
constructs. Truth, as we perceive it, is itself socially constructed. Analytic philosophy is
the conviction that to some significant degree, philosophical problems, puzzles, and errors
are rooted in language and can be solved or avoided by a sound understanding of
language and careful attention to its workings. 'Analysis' refers to a method; owing a great
deal to the pioneers, Bertrand Russell, G.E. Moore, Wittgenstein, and J.L. Austin.
Critics are apt to point these concerns-they might say – this fixation with language and
logic as one aspect of the trivialization of philosophy with which they charge the analytic
movement. In any case, the last two to three decades have seen, on the one hand,
increased self-searching as to the limitations of the analytic approach and more efforts to
apply it to such deeper questions (Shields 2012).

E. Logic and Critical Thinking: Tools in Reasoning

Logic is centered in the analysis and construction of arguments. Logic and critical
thinking serve as paths to freedom from half-truths and deceptions. Critical thinking is
distinguishing facts and opinions or personal feelings. In making rational choices, first,
we suspend beliefs and judgment until all facts have been gathered and considered.
Though facts are important, critical thinking also takes into consideration cultural
systems, values, and beliefs. Critical thinking helps us uncover bias and prejudice and
open to new ideas not necessarily in agreement with previous thought.

In general, there are two basic types of reasoning: deductive and inductive. Inductive
reasoning is based from observations in order to make generalizations. This reasoning is
often applied in prediction, forecasting, or behavior.

Deductive reasoning draws conclusion from usually one broad judgment or definition and
one more specific assertion, often an inference.
Take-for instance:
All philosophers are wise. (Major premise)
Confucius is a philosopher. (Minor premise)
Therefore, Confucius is wise. (Conclusion)

What are the Validity and Soundness of an Argument?

Based on the previous example (or syllogism), if the two premises are constructed logically,
then the conclusion must follow logically, the deductive argument is valid. This does not
necessarily mean that the conclusion is true or false. Validity comes from a logical
conclusion based on logically constructed premises (Reed 2010).

Strength of an Argument
On the other hand, inductive arguments cannot prove if the premises are true which will
also determine the truth of the conclusion. Inductive reasoning proves only probable
support to the conclusion. An inductive argument that succeeds in providing such
probable support is a strong argument. While an inductive argument that fails to provide
such support is weak, a strong argument with true premises is said to be cogent.
For example:
Jay: Do you think Congressman Gerry will be re-elected?
Yna: l doubt it. His district has become more conservative in recent years.
Also, 63% of the registered voters in his district are in the Opposition.
This argument is both a statistical argument and a predictive argument, which are two
common patterns of inductive reasoning. Also, the conclusion does not follow necessarily
from the premises.
Applying Logic and Fallacies in Determining Truth from Opinion
At the beginning of the Tractatus, Ludwig Wittgenstein speaks of the picture that we can
form of reality, and in which, by way of a model, we represent the existence and non-
existence of state of affairs.
Tractatus identifies the relationship between language and reality and to define the limits
of science. It is recognized as a significant philosophical work of the twentieth century. It
is in the possibility of agreeing or disagreeing with reality, thus being true or false, that
the meaning of the picture lies.
The same thoughts occur later when Wittgenstein describes spoken and written language,
that is, propositions, as one of these pictures and defines its meaning in terms of its
capacity for being true or false. The limits of what can be said, therefore, are defined by
the logical rules. The limits of my language mean the limit of my world.
The logic of language shows how elements fit states of affairs and how state of affairs in
wider constellations can be linked together; we can decide on the basis of this logic.

What are Arguments? An argument is a presentation of reasons for a particular claim. It

is composed of premises (statements that express your reason or evidence). These
premises must be arranged in an appropriate way in order to support your conclusion.
A fallacy is a defect in an argument other than its having false premises.
To detect fallacies, it is required to examine the argument’s content. Here are some of the
usually committed errors in reasoning and thus, coming up with false conclusion and
worse, distorting the truth.
A. Appeal to pity (Argumentum ad misericordiam) A specific kind of appeal to emotion
in which someone tries to win support for an argument or idea by exploiting his or her
opponent’s feelings of pity or guilt.
Example:
Boss: 'You're late for work. I'm going to have to write you up.'
Employee: 'Please don't write me up. If I get fired I'll lose my house and not have any way
to feed my family.'
B. Appeal to ignorance (Argumentum ad ignorantiam)
Whatever has not been proved false must be true, and vice versa.
Example: Although we have proven that the moon is not made of spare ribs, we have not
proven that its core cannot be filled with them; therefore, the moon’s core is filled with
spare ribs.

C. Equivocation
This is a logical chain of reasoning of a term or a word several times, but giving the
particular word a different meaning each time.
Example: Human beings have hands; the clock has hands. He is drinking from the pitcher
of water; he is a baseball pitcher.
D. Composition
This infers that something is true of the whole from the fact that it is true of some part of
the whole. The reverse of this fallacy is division.
Example: Hydrogen is not wet. Oxygen is not wet. Therefore, water (H2O) is not wet.
E. Division
One reasons logically that something true of a thing must also be true of a or some of its
parts.
Example: His house is about half the size of most houses in the neighborhood. Therefore,
his doors must all be about 3 1/2 feet high.
F. Against the Person (Argumentum ad hominem)
This fallacy attempts to link the validity of a premise to a characterstic or belief of the
person advocating the premise.
Example: My opponent suggests that lowering taxes will be a good idea -- this is coming
from a woman who eats a pint of Ben and Jerry’s each night!
G. Appeal to force (Argumentum ad baculum)
An argument where force, coercion, or the threat of force, is given as a justification for a
conclusion.
Example:
Melvin: Boss, why do I have to work weekends when nobody else in the company does?
Boss: Am I sensing insubordination? I can find another employee very quickly you know.
H. Appeal to the people (Argumentum adpopulum)
An argument that appeals or exploits people’s vanities, desire for esteem, and anchoring
on popularity.
Example: Mormonism is one of the fastest growing sects of Christianity today so that
whole story about Joseph Smith getting the golden plates that, unfortunately, disappeared
back into heaven, must be true!
I. False cause (post hoc)
Since that event followed this one, that event must have been caused by this one. This
fallacy is also referred to as coincidental correlation, or correlation not causation.
Example:
(1) Cellphone usage has increased exponentially in the last 20 years.
(2) Researchers discovered that the incidences of brain cancer have also increased in that
time.
(3) Therefore, cellphone usage must cause brain cancer.
J. Hasty generalization
One commits errors if one reaches an inductive generalization based an insufficient
evidence. The fallacy is commonly based on a broad conclusion upon the statistics of a
survey of a small group that fails to sufficiently represent the whole population.
Example:
(1) My roommate from Davao loves Durian.
(2) Therefore, all people from Davao must love Durian.
K. Begging the question (petition principle)
This is a type of fallacy in which the proposition to be proven is assumed implicitly or
explicitly in the premise.
Example: Everyone wants the new iPhone because it is the hottest new gadget on the
market!
Ignorance can be cloaked in a false aura of authority. This fact casts serious doubt on the
general competence of newsmagazine writers who talk so flippantly on technical matters.
Handouts for instance are fed to news reporters by government agencies and others who
speak English. This is why most news journals or news reports give the same details.
Some correspondents are also culturally incompetent who are not aware of the language
or customs of the countries that they are sent (Copi & Cohen 2010).
 ASSESSMENT

Direction: Select the letter of the best answer. Write your answer on a separate
sheet of paper.
1. Beyond exalting individual analysis of truth, postmodernists adhere to a relational,
atomistic approach.
A. True B. False C. Partly False D. Partly True
2. Which is false about postmodernism?
A. It rightly talks about the philosophy, the philosophy of many cultures, but such
talk is not a philosophy either.
B. Postmodernists value our existence in the world and in relation to it.
C. Reality can be known or described objectively by postmodernists
D. All of the above
3. Philosophical problems, puzzles and errors are rooted in language and can be solved or
avoided by a sound understanding of language.
A. Analytic Philosophy C. Language
B. Ludwig Wittgenstein D. Analysis
4. It is centered in the analysis and construction of arguments.
A. Rationalization B. Language C. Phenomenon D. Logic
5. This dog always barks when someone is at the door, and the dog didn’t bark.
A. Someone is at the door C. There’s no one at the door
B. The dog barks D. The dog barks at someone
6. What study states that truth is based in exercising choices?
A. Phenomenology B. Existentialism C. Modernism D. Logic
7. Existentialism is more outlook or attitude supported by diverse doctrines centered on a
certain common themes. Which of the following does not belong?
A. The significant (and unavoidability)of choice and decision in the absence of
certainty.
B. The human response to that condition.
C. Human freedom
D. Every act of consciousness is directed at some object or another
8. I heard that the Catholic Church was involved in a sex scandal cover - up . Therefore,
my 102 year old neighbor, who frequently attends church’ is guilty as well!
A. Equivocation B. Composition C. Division D. Appeal to ignorance
9. My opponent suggest that lowering taxes will be a good idea –this is coming from a
woman who eats a pint of Ben and Jerry’s each night!
A. Equivocation B. Composition C. Division D. Against the person
10. Your brain is made of molecules. A molecule does not have consciousness. Therefore
your brain cannot be the source of consciousness.
A. Equivocation B. Composition C. Division D. Against the person
11. Jordan: Dad, why do I have to spend my summer at Jesus camp?
Dad: Because if you don’t, you will spend your entire summer in your room with
nothing but your bible!
A. Appeal to force B. Against to the person C. Composition D. Division
12. Watching TV that close will make you go blind, so move back!
A. Composition B. False Cause C. Begging the question D. Division
13. My father smoked four packs of cigarettes a day since age sixty – nine. Therefore,
smoking really can’t be that bad for you.
A. False Cause B. Divison C. Hasty Generalization D. Composition
14. Paranormal activity is real because I have experience what can only be described as
paranormal activity.
A. Begging Question B. Division C. Hasty Generalization D. Composition
15. This is a type of fallacy in which the proposition to be proven is assumed implicitly in
the premise.
A. False Cause B. Hasty Generalization C. Begging Question D. Division

Learning Competency 2.2 – 2.3

2.2 Realize that the methods of philosophy lead to wisdom and truth.
2.3 Evaluate truth from opinions in different situations using the methods of philosophizing

WHAT I KNOW?

Direction: Select the letter of the best answer. Write your answer on a separate sheet of
paper.
1. The methodology or method that philosophers use to address philosophical question is
_______________.
A. Philosophizing C. Analytical Thinking
B. Philosophical Method D. Critical Thinking
2. What are the attributes of a critical thinker?
A. Looks for proof C. Examines Problems
B. Adjust Opinions D. All of these choices
3. Which of the following does not belong to the group?
A. Willingness to change one point of view.
B. Looks for evidence to support assumption and beliefs
C. Rejects irrelevant and incorrect information
D. Looks for proof
4. If one accepts one’s limits or has the courage to say “I don’t know,”then it becomes an
honest appraisal of say, solving problem.
A. Partly True B. Partly False C. False D. True
5. What is the subject matter of philosophy?
A. Questions B. Logical Answers C. Critical Thinking D. None of these
6. This means understanding of philosophy and refraining from merely giving claims but
through careful thought.
A. Science B. Systematic C. Critical Thinking D. Rational Thinking
7. Philosophical questions have answers, but the answers remain in _________.
A. Dispute B. Harmony C. Agreement D. Argument
8. Philosophical questions cannot be settled by________.
A. Science B. Common Sense C. Faith D. All of these choices
9. Philosophical questions are of __________intellectual interest to human beings.
A. Dated B. Outworn C. Never – Ending D. None of these choices
10. Critical Thinking is the careful and ______ approach to questions of very general
interest.
A. Irrational B. Systematic C. Reflective D. Both reflective & Systematic

WHAT IS IT?

What are the characteristics of philosophical questions?

For Double (1999), although philosophy is an organized body of knowledge, the subject
matter of philosophy is questions, which have three major characteristics:
 Philosophical questions have answers, but the answers remain in dispute.
 Philosophical questions cannot be settled by science, common sense, or faith.
 Philosophical questions are of perennial intellectual interest to human beings.
The methodology or method that philosophers use to address philosophical questions is
critical thinking.
Critical thinking is the careful, reflective, rational, and systematic approach to questions
of very general interest. Critical thinking means understanding of philosophy and refraining
from merely giving claims but through careful thought, one reasons through argumentations.
One tries to become a “philosopher because one possesses and cherishes above the rest of
humanity the ”love of wisdom” which is a part of all human nature and because one more
reflectively and critically brings to light and examines the largest and widest implications
of the life of all human beings.

For Maboloc and Pascua (2008), critical thinking is a lifelong process self-
assessment that further consists of:
° defining, analyzing, and devising solutions;
° arriving at reasonable and informed conclusions;
° applying understanding and knowledge to new and different problems;
° willingness to change one point of view;
° continually examining and re-examining ideas; and
° willingness to say "I don't know."

What are the attributes of a critical thinker?

The attributes of a critical thinker include:
° Looks for evidence to support assumption and beliefs
° Adjusts opinions
° Looks for proof
° Examines problem
° Rejects irrelevant and incorrect information

If one accepts one’s limits or has the courage to say “I don’t know," then it becomes an
honest appraisal of say, solving a problem. Only if one is able to be willing to change
one’s point of view based on arising evidence and continually re-examining ideas, can
a more holistic perspective of truth be arrived at.
Critical thinking and logic are important tools to distinguish facts from opinions. An
opinion can be a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce
complete certainty. It is a personal view, attitude, or appraisal or personal feelings.
Asking relevant questions, assessing arguments and statements, looking for evidence
to support assumption and beliefs, and deciding rationally what to believe or not are
important to evaluate opinions.

A fact is a statement that can be proven true or false.

Opinions can be based on facts or emotions and sometimes they are meant to
deliberately mislead others. Therefore, it is important to be aware of the author’s
purpose and choice of language. Sometimes, the author lets the facts speak for
themselves.
Example of a fact:
With fewer cars on the road, there would be less air pollution and traffic noise;
therefore, the use of mass transportation should be encouraged. Sometimes the
author may use descriptive language to appeal to your emotions and sway your
thinking.
Example of an opinion:
Do you like looking at a smoggy view from a congested highway? How do you feel
about fighting road hugs and bumper to bumper traffic every day?
Mass transportation is the solution to all these problems. Emotional language is
neither right nor wrong, but the way in which it is used can be positive or negative; it
is up to you to make reasonable judgement about the material you are reading and to
draw your own conclusion.
Therefore, when you read, it is important to judge facts and opinions carefully in order
to come to the right conclusion. Ask yourself, “are the facts reliable?” or “are the
opinions based on the facts?” Once you answer these questions, you may be on the
right track for finding and sticking to the facts.

ASSESSMENT

Direction: Select the letter of the best answer. Write your answer on a separate sheet of
paper.

1. What is/are important tools to distinguish facts from opinions?

A. Both critical thinking and logic C. Critical Thinking
B. Logic D. Philosophical Questions
2. A/an ________ can be a belief or judgement that rests on grounds insufficient to
produce complete certainty.
A. Question B. Truth C. Opinion D. Fact
3. What is /are important in evaluating opinions?
A. Assessing arguments and statement
B. Looking for evidence to support assumption
C. Asking relevant questions
D. All of these choices

4. A / an _____ is a statement that can be proven true or false.

A. Question B. Opinion C. Fact D. Truth
5. Opinions can be based on facts.
A. Partly True B. True C. False D. Partly False
6 It is neither right nor wrong , but the way in which it is used can be positive or
negative.
A. Emotional language
B. Both emotional language and descriptive language
C. Interrogative language
D. Descriptive language
7. I do not agree with some philosophers.
A. Fact B. Opinion C. Truth D. False
8. According to sales records , strawberry ice - cream is the worst selling of all flavors.
A. Truth B. Opinion C. False D. Fact
9. Mr. Rodrigo Duterte is the greatest president.
A. Truth B. Opinion C. False D. Fact
10. I love you.
A. Truth B. Opinion C. False D. Fact