Introduction to Philosophy

Methods of Philosophizing

OBJECTIVES
At the end of this lesson, the student will be able to:
● distinguish opinion from truth;
● Analyze situations that show the difference between opinion and truth;
● realize that the methods of philosophy lead to wisdom and truth;
● evaluate opinions.

Etymological Definition
Philosophy means “Love of wisdom.”

WISDOM means the good exercise or application of knowledge.

TRUTH is the ultimate object of knowledge.

To philosophize, therefore, is to be in a quest, or to have the desire towards living the truth.

THE NATURE OF TRUTH

Allegory of the Cave

It tells of men who have remained closed since they were children in a subterranean cave,
chained so that they can only see the bottom of the cave.
Behind them stands a high and remote light, and between the light and the prisoners there is a
wall that runs alongside a path. On the path walk some people carrying different objects, some
argue, others do not.
Whoever is in the caves, having never observed the true object, thinks that the shadow cast at
the bottom of the cave must be the real object, and that the echoes are the true voices of those
people.
A prisoner frees himself and goes up the cave.
For him it is long and painful, because his eyes, which are not accustomed to light, hurt so much
more that he approaches the opening of the cave.
Once accustomed, however, the prisoner can see that the shadows were only the projection of
the objects brought by the servants behind the wall and now he thinks these are the real
objects.
Walking will succeed in getting out of the cave and here the image of the prisoner is to indicate
the philosopher, as time goes by he gets closer and closer to being able to look directly at the
sunlight. It will first observe the reflections of real things because it is still unable to look at them
directly, dazzled by the light, finally its eyes will get used to it and will be able to see the sunlight
directly, which makes real objects visible.
The man, finally free, decides to spread this knowledge, but returning to the cave, he must get
used to the darkness again, and the other men will not be ready to follow him on a path that
brings a lot of suffering.
https://studyhowandwhy.altervista.org/the-platos-allegory-of-the-cave-short-summary/

BEARERS OF TRUTH
The first thing that we need to understand about truth is that it is a kind of property whose
opposite is falsity. Something that is said to be true, which we express as “truth” or “a truth,” is
said to have the property of truth or being true. The things that can be properly said to be true,
or to which we can properly attribute the property of truth, are referred to by philosophers as
the “bearers of truth.” And there usually are three candidates for the bearers of truth namely:
Beliefs, Statements, and Sentences

STATEMENT
What we call a statement, which philosophers also call a “proposition”, refers to a linguistic
expression whose function is to advance a claim about the world. This claim may be about the
world. This claim may be about things or events in the world or about relations of ideas.

BELIEFS
Beliefs, in this regard are the mental expressions of our claims. The only difference between the
statement “Two and two are four” and the belief “Two and two are four” is that statement is
expressed linguistically while the belief is made in the mind.

SENTENCE
A sentence expresses a statement if something has been claimed to be true, and what
has been said is either true or false.

Kinds of Truth
A. The question of whether the truth of a belief or statement is established or arrived at by
means of sense experience or reason gives rise to the difference between empirical truth and
rational truth.

● Empirical Truth (sense experience)

● Rational Truth (reason)

Empirical Truth is technically described as a posteriori, which means that it can only be known
after some relevant experience. On the other hand, rational truth is technically described as a
priori, which means that it can be known before some relevant experience.

For example:
Empirical Truth
- “It is raining.”

Rational Truth
- “Five and five is ten.” (Mathematical statements…)

B. The question of whether or not knowing the truth of a statement or belief extends our
knowledge or adds to what we already know. This question gives rise to the difference
between synthetic truth and analytic truth.

● Synthetic Truth (extends knowledge)

● Analytic Truth (does not)

C. Third is the question of whether or not the truth of a belief or statement is dependent on the
attitudes, preferences, or interests of a person. This gives rise to the difference between
subjective truth and objective truth. Subjective truth is dependent on the attitudes, preferences,
or interests of a person; while objective truth is not.

D. Fourth, is the question whether a belief or statement is acknowledged to be true by everyone

or only by some people. This gives rise to the difference between universal truth and relative
truth. Something is universally true if its truth is acknowledged by everyone, while something is
relatively true if its truth is acknowledged only by some people.

E. Fifth, is the question of under what area of study does the topic or content of a belief or
statement that is held to be true falls. This gives rise to a number of kinds of truth, as many as
there are different areas of study. We may call these truths disciplinal kinds of truth. For
instance, we have religious truth, scientific truth, psychological truth, biological truth, and
economic truth.

Ways of Knowing
● The ways of knowing or the methods of truth can be distinguished into particular and
general kinds. The general methods refer to the methods of truth described by the
philosophers as “theories of truth,” mainly consisting of the correspondence,
coherence, and pragmatic theories.

● The particular methods of truth that we shall examine are observation, reasoning,
intuition, mystical experience, and the appeal to authority.

GENERAL METHOD
● According to the general method of CORRESPONDENCE, we can know whether a
statement/belief is true by examining whether the statement/belief corresponds to, or
represents, a fact in the world.
 For example, “the sky is blue” is true because it represents to the fact that the sky is
blue.

● According to the general method of COHERENCE, we can know whether a statement is

true by examining whether the statement coheres with rules of the relevant system.
For example, the statement “three and three are six” is true because it coheres with the
rules of the mathematical system.

● An according to the general method of pragmatism, we can know whether a statement is

true by examining the consequences of holding or accepting the statement to be true. If
holding the statement or belief to be true results in beneficial consequences, then it is
true. For instance, some people who think that there are ghosts or vampires based their
belief in fact that they find it useful to hold such a belief - like explaining unusual
phenomena and dealing with their fears.

PARTICULAR METHOD
● However, the question about the general methods of truth is, how does one know
whether a statement/belief does correspond to the fact, coheres with the rule of a
system, or results in beneficial consequences? To know this requires some
specific/particular methods.
● The particular methods of truth are; by observation, reasoning, intuition, mystical
experience, and the appeal to authority.

OPINION, FACT AND TRUTH

Opinion
It is an expression of one’s feelings based on facts, emotions, and beliefs or views.

Example
Filipinos are the most resilient and hospitable people in the world.

Fact
It is a statement that can be checked and backed up with evidence. It is often used in
conjunction with research and study.

Truth
Something that has actual and proven existence scientifically and spiritually regardless of
one’s opinion and beliefs.

Example
God exists.

In Brief…
● Opinion - what someone believes or thinks
● Fact - Firmly planted in the material world
 ● Truth - extends to the spiritual realm

Methods of Philosophizing
● Dialectic Method
● Socratic Method
● Scientific Method

Dialectic Method
● Comes from the Greek word “dialektike” which means “conversation”.
● It is the art of talking back and forth, disagreeing with one another, and arguing about
contentious issues.

Socratic Method
● Developed by Socrates who was a Greek philosopher and teacher.
● Comes from the Greek word “elenchus”, meaning to inquire or cross-examine.

Dialectic and Socratic Method

Both Dialectic method and Socratic method are based on a dialogue between two or more
people who may hold differing views but wish to pursue the truth by seeking agreement with one
another.

DIALECTIC SOCRATIC

ORIGIN dialektike elenchus

MEANING Art of conversation Inquiry or cross-examination

MAIN POINTS To ask, to clarify, to disagree To ask, to find/use example,

to reject, to ask again
(intelligent questions)

PURPOSE To gain knowledge, to reach To gain knowledge, to reach

the truth and have new the truth and have new
wisdom wisdom

EXAMPLE Do you agree with X? Why or What is X? To what extent

why not? must we be X? How do you
X?

METHODS OF PHILOSOPHIZING
Scientific Method
● Also called empirical method, it is a process of determining truth or knowledge
through experimentation, inductive and deductive reasoning, and hypothesis or theory
testing.

On Fallacies
What are fallacies?
Fallacies are illogical conclusion but not necessarily a false statement. They violate the
rules of logical thought, but often seen plausible or even convincing.

Most common fallacies

1. Ad Populum
2. Ad Hominem
3. False Dichotomy
4. Non sequitur
5. Reductio ad Hitlerum
6. Ad Misericordiam

Ad Populum
Using the popularity of a premise or proposition as evidence for its truthfulness.
● This is a fallacy which is very difficult to spot because our “common sense” tells us that if
something is popular, it must be good/true/valid, but this is not so, especially in a
society where clever marketing, social and political weight, and money can buy
popularity.

Form of Argument
Everybody is doing X.
Therefore, X must be the right things to do.

Ad Hominem
This is when you attack your opponent as a human being rather than dealing with their
arguments.

Form of Argument
Person 1 is claiming Y.
Person 1 is a moron.
Therefore, Y is not true.

False Dichotomy
Sometimes a person will present two possible options and argue that we need to choose
between them. But this assumes that there is no third option, and that might not be true.

Form of Argument
Either X or Y is true.
Either X, Y, or Z is true.

Non-Sequitur
This is when a person draws a conclusion that does not follow logically from the evidence.

Form of Argument
Claim A is made.
Evidence is presented for claim A.
Therefore, claim C is true.

Reduction and Hitlerum

● The attempt to make an argument analogous with Hitler or the Nazi party. Hitler is
probably the most universally despised figure in history, so any connection to Hitler, or
his beliefs, can (erroneously) cause others to view the argument in a similar light.

Form of Argument
Person 1 suggests that Y is true.
Hitler liked Y.
Therefore, Y is false.

Ad Misericordiam
● When an argument relies on pity or sympathy and altruism (sacrifice for the sake of
the other). This pity may be directed toward the arguer or some third party.

Example
Q: Why did you steal money?
A: I’m out of work, my family hasn’t eaten in two days.