Philosophy 101-WPS Office

Name: : Gbolagade Joseph Oluseyi
Department: : Law
Matric Number: : 230307
Date: : 8th of November, 2022
Course: : Philosophy 101
Assignment. : Summarize Chapter 1(The Nature of
Rational Inquiry)of
the book; Methodology of Research and
Writing in
Philosophy
THE NATURE OF RATIONAL INQUIRY.
Rationality or "being rational" is a key feature that distinguishes human beings from animals
according to Aristotle. However, the term "rational" is used to characterise not only agents or
specific beliefs but also behaviours and activities. Rationality is either contrasted with non-
rationality or irrationality.
A being that is capable of being rational but violates this is said to be irrational. Among
human beings, some beliefs are non-rational since they are matters of taste or preference and
no reasons required. Also rational beliefs contrast with those arrived through faith, emotions
authority of arbitrary choices.
Rational inquiry which is the standard description of philosophy is an activity which consists of a
systematic search for truth, knowledge or the principles of reality. Any human activity that must
qualify as a rational inquiry must be carried out according to certain procedures or methods,
principles or norms, canons and rules, which to a large extent are regarded as universal,
foundational and fixed. Rationality os closely related to truth, reality,universality, objectivity
and permanence.
A very important component or element of rational enquiry conducted in writing and research
is argument. The beginning of a philosophical essay introduces an argument, the middle
elaborates it, the end summarises it . There are 2 types of argument: good and bad ones.
A good argument is one that shows the rational way to go from true premises to a true
conclusion . According to Martinich, the notion of a good argument can be made progressively
more precise by considering the following definitions:
1) An argument is a sequence of words of 2 or more propositions of which one os designated as

the conclusion and all the others are premises.
2) A sound argument is am argument which is valid and which contains only true premises
3) An argument is valid if and only if it's necessary that if all the premises are true, then the
conclusion is true.
4) A cogent argument is a sound argument that is recognized to be such in virtue of the
presentation of it's structure and content.
In arguments, we deal with propositions or statements as the only linguistic item that can be
true or false. Questions,appeals,requests and commands are not employed as logical contents
of argument in an enquiry.This is because they are not capable of being true or false . In an
argument, only propositions or statements can be true or false.
In the systematic procedure of rational inquiry, propositions or statementsare joined by

certain connectives. Such connectives are employed as "and" in cases of conjuncts.Un
disjunction, two statements taken to be disjuncts are put together with "
either....or".Conditonal statements are a combination of two proposition and are joined
together with'if and then', the first part of which is an antecedent and the second part is the
consequence.
There are two ways in which an argument can be qualified: deductive and inductive. Only
deductive arguments can either be valid or invalid. A deductive argument is valid if the
conclusion follows necessarily from the premises. It is impossible for the premises and
conclusion to be false.
Example: All men are mortal
Plato is a man
Therefore, Plato is a man
Inductive arguments begin with propositions of a general type such as leading to propositions
of a general type. Example:
Plato is a man and Plato is mortal
Aristotle is a man and Aristotle is mortal
Descartes is a man and Descartes is mortal
Rorty is a man and Rorty is mortal.
Therefore, all men are mortal
Inductive arguments are arrived at and inferred from premises presented. Since the conclusion
of an inductive argument cannot be said tofollow necessarily from the premises and therefore
the argument cannot be described as valid or invalid.
The Goal of Rational Inquiry

Rational inquiry is a systematic search for knowledge and truth following appropriate principles
of reasoning. The goal of any rational inquiry is the production of knowledge. Such knowledge is
usually represented in claims that are true and are regarded as theses, hypotheses and
theories.
Knowledge claims, theses,hypotheses, theories and laws, arrived at through rational inquiry are
emoloyed in the explanations and predictions of the world or aspects of it. In such explanations,
2 forms of approach can be adopted;
(i) the deductive normological model of explanation.
(ii) the inductive probabilistic model for explanation.
Laws of Thought
Laws ot thought are taken as norms that guide and underlie the thoughts and actions of
rational agents. They are the fundamental axiomatic rules that guide rational discourse.
The laws of thought are associated with 3 expressions: the law of identity, the law of
contradiction (non-contradiction), and the law if excluded middle.
The law of identity is represented as "everything is (that is , identical to) itself";the law of
contradiction (or non-contradiction) is captured as " there is nothing which has a given quality
that also has a negative of that quality; the law of excluded middle is given as "everything either
has a given quality or has the negative of that quality.

Philosophy 101-WPS Office

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Philosophy 101-WPS Office

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Philosophy 101-WPS Office

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Name: : Gbolagade Joseph Oluseyi

1) An argument is a sequence of words of 2 or more propositions of which one os designated as

In the systematic procedure of rational inquiry, propositions or statementsare joined by

Example: All men are mortal

Therefore, Plato is a man

Plato is a man and Plato is mortal

Aristotle is a man and Aristotle is mortal

Descartes is a man and Descartes is mortal

Rorty is a man and Rorty is mortal.

Therefore, all men are mortal

The Goal of Rational Inquiry

(i) the deductive normological model of explanation.

(ii) the inductive probabilistic model for explanation.

You might also like