1. Heraclites
1.1. Flux is the heart of existence, nothing IS. everything BECOMES. --> Panta rei. You cannot step in the same river twice
2. Parmenides
2.1. Things cannot just come from nothing. now can they dissolve into nothing. hence, everything changes into different things. nothing becomes. everything is. (when you die, your body doe not cease to exist. it merely shapeshifts into dust)
3. Protagorus
3.1. Homo Mensura. man is the measure of all things. The opinion is true to each person which he requires trough sensation
4. medieval times
4.1. worldview
4.1.1. Earth centered, human centered. earth is the centre of the universe
4.1.2. Aristotle and the Bible: most important authorities of knowledge
4.1.3. Aristotle: superlunary realm + sublunary realm OR celestial + terrestrial OR perfect versus not so perfect
4.1.3.1. Quinta Essential: heavenly sphere
4.2. Ptolemy
4.2.1. Almagest --> model of the solar system
4.2.2. Geocentric worldview --> planets circle the earth
4.3. Copernicus
4.3.1. Planets circle the sun biatch --> Heliocentric approach
4.3.1.1. changed the worldview completely
4.4. Francis Bacon
4.4.1. 4 distortions of our senses: Idols of the cave, Idols of the tribe, Idols of the theater, Idols of the market
4.4.2. theories have to be based on observations. deduction is not trustworthy because of the distortions that arise when you start with a theory
4.4.3. Ants: collecting data only. Bees: collecting data and using reason to reach conclusion. Spiders: using only what comes from within (reason)
5. Post scientific revolution
5.1. Positivists are methodological monists: only one method that should be used in all sciences
5.2. Positivism
5.2.1. social sciences same method as natural sciences
5.2.2. the world is a clockwork: mechanization of the worldview
5.2.3. Compte, bee (like bacon)
5.2.3.1. 3 stages of societal development: theological stage, metaphysical stage, positive stage
5.2.3.2. theological stage has animism: objects have a soul (mana) and polytheism: objects are under the control of deities/ monotheism
5.2.3.3. psychology is not a science (mental process cannot be observed)
5.2.3.4. encyclopedia formula: order of sciences. sociology is more complex than maths
5.3. Hermeneutics
5.3.1. Humans are motivated by inside forces; natural phenomena are moved by outside forces. they require different methods
5.4. Dilthy
5.4.1. people do things because they are goal-directed, and this is completely unpredictable
5.4.2. we can understand other people because we are able to understand ourselves
5.5. Windelband
5.6. Max Weber
5.6.1. Verstehen versus erklaren: trying to see people’s worlds from their perspective using imagination versus trying to explain things in terms of causes (natural sciences)
6. Logical Positivism, 1920 onwards
6.1. The Vienna circle (or Wiener Kreis)
6.1.1. divide: physicalism versus phenomenalism
6.1.1.1. Protocol sentences versus physical language
6.1.1.2. Neurath+Carnap : Physicalist
6.1.1.3. Schlick+Wittgenstein+ Ernest Mach : Phenomenalist
6.1.2. Question: how do we distinguish science and non-science? neo-positivist q
6.1.2.1. Compte: If you can use it to predict shit, it's legit.
6.1.2.2. throw rationalism overboard. give philosophers a new task: to look at language that scientists use.
6.1.2.2.1. If we can't put it into words, it doesn't exist
6.2. positivism: Based on sensory input, we come up with hypothesis
6.3. Logical positivism: adding maths and logical analyses to make hypothesis more technical.
6.4. Ludwig Wittgenstein
6.4.1. Formal
6.4.1.1. Logical statements. tell you nothing new. analytic. tool for building models. a bachelor is unmarried. 2+2=4
6.4.1.2. Unchangeable
6.4.2. Factual
6.4.2.1. new info. sensory experience needed. synthetic statements. 200 people in this room
6.4.2.2. changeable
6.4.3. Fictional
6.4.3.1. cannot be verified, undefined words. my soul is immaterial.
6.5. Methodological monotheists
6.5.1. Hermeneutics referred to their social science with words like, desire, feeling, intention. Which is metaphysical as shit.
7. Critical Rationalism
7.1. Opposing Logical Positivism
7.2. Karl Popper
7.2.1. We cannot get all the data in the world. therefore we cannot make statements based on the empirical data that we do have.
7.2.2. We should not look for evidence or verification
7.2.3. Method of falsification: hypothesis - deducting predictions - testing predictions - true? =corroboration, does not add to the probability of the hypothesis. false? = falsification. now we have learned something about the world
7.2.4. no tabula rasa: you start with reason (hypothesis)
7.2.5. searchlight theory: we observe in light of expectations
7.2.6. falsification does not make a hypothesis unscientific
7.2.7. paradigm shifts happen gradually
8. Language games
8.1. Thomas Kuhn, relativist
8.1.1. Paradigm: the sum of accepted metaphysical assumptions, theories, methodologies annuals and techniques within a community of scientists
8.1.1.1. Which makes education a friendly form of indoctrination
8.1.2. An indicator of a period of normal science is the unquestioned idea that the paradigm is basically correct. Otherwise, you wouldn’t try to solve problems within this realm
8.1.3. an outdated paradigm is not unscientific. it is just different from ours.
8.1.4. paradigm shifts happen adruptly
8.1.4.1. gestalt shift
8.1.4.1.1. a scientific is like a political revolution: crisis; change from within is in both cases impossible; both contain characters that live in a different world and can’t communicate with each other. both cases the solution comes from outside
8.1.5. Pre-scientific period → normal science→ crisis→ scientific revolution/paradigm shift→ new period of normal science
8.1.5.1. Abnormal science: a totally new paradigm presents itself.
8.1.5.2. different paradigms are incommensurable (impossible to compare)
8.1.5.2.1. 1) the terms of the old paradigm are used in the new one, however they have a completely new relationship to each other. 2) communication between scientists of different paradigms is highly problematic; there is no neutral or objective language. 3) the proponents of the different paradigms work in different worlds
8.2. Ludwig Wittgenstein
8.2.1. new publication, new me --> the meaning of words, lies in the use of those words
8.2.1.1. Language is not a representation of reality
8.2.2. language game: Any factual claim about the world is only true or false relative to the language game.
8.2.3. private language argument: other players are requiered
8.3. Relativism
8.3.1. the view that the truth of a claim depends on a framework in which the claim has its proper place.
8.3.2. We observe everything in the light of what we expect to observe, and what we expect is determined by the framework of our culture. Anything that does not fit the framework is left out of the field of observation. theory ladenness
8.4. Norwood Russel Hanson
8.4.1. we see through spectacles of our past experience, knowledge and the logical forms of our languages
8.5. constructivism
8.5.1. through relativism and theory-ladeness and different frameworks, reality becomes our own construction
8.6. Franz Boas
8.6.1. Sapir-Whorf hypothesis
8.6.1.1. what one can think about and what one can perceive is relative to the language one speaks. Language is a way of classifying experiences
9. Anarchy
10. Socrates
10.1. what is knowledge? 'i know that i know nothing' --> scentenced to death because of corrupting the youth
11. Plato, rationalist
11.1. If Knowledge comes from perception, we cannot know anything for certain because the world is in constant flux
11.1.1. Truth is about how things really are, not about how they are perceived. To you the wind feels cold, to me it feels warm, but the wind is either one of those things
11.2. world of eternal forms: we cannot reach this world with our senses, we must use ratio. our senses will always deceive us + the world is in flux so we will always perceive it differently than how it actually is
11.2.1. Allegory of the cave
11.2.2. To learn is to remember --> innate ideas --> nativism
12. Aristotle, empiricist
12.1. not two worlds and not innate ideas. we are born a blank slate or tabula rasa
12.1.1. nothing is in the mind that was not first in the senses: Peripatetic Axiom
12.2. we must reason through causes and empirical data. all humans are mortal, socrates is human, socrates is mortal --> syllogism/inductive argument
12.3. NOT a radical empiricist because: no set of data is complete and we must use reason to come to truthful conclusions
12.3.1. 4 causes:Formal cause, Material cause, efficient cause, final cause. OR who/what, material, changeable factor, goal
13. scientific revolution
13.1. rejection of authority + using experiments to gather data + the world is seen as a clockwork (or mechanics) + these mechanics could be described in mathematical terms --> universal maths
13.2. Johannes Kepler: planets don't make perfect circles around each other
13.3. Gallileo Gallilei: The moon is not a perfect ball. it has craters and dents
13.4. Newton:
13.4.1. universal law: gravity. objects are no longer treaded as if they have a will. they are just subject to gravity and that's why they move around
14. Early modern time
14.1. Decartes, rationalist
14.1.1. Empiricism is not trustworthy because our senses can deceive us. Rational methods like maths are not trustworthy because humans are fallible and so are our creations. doubt remains
14.1.2. Cogito ergo sum
14.1.3. ideas that don't stem from experience (infinity and god) god has placed in us. God is perfect, therefore he exists. also he would not deceive us by letting us live a dream. so we exist. he is not an evil spirit or malin genie
14.1.4. malin génie: the source of all sense distortions
14.2. Berkely
14.2.1. Two-fold existence isn’t a thing since the ideas that we base of off material object requires these material objects to actually exist.
14.2.2. Everything that exists, exists in virtue of being perceived: esse est percipi
14.2.3. So if things disappear when you do not perceive them (to be is to be perceived), what stops us from disappearing into oblivion? God. He sees everything all the time.
14.2.4. Immaterialism: ideas can only exist in a mental substance; all physical objects are determined by that substance.
14.2.5. Dualism: there is a material substance and a mental substance that can exist on their own, independently from each other
14.3. John Locke, empiricist
14.3.1. 3 qualities: primary, secondary and tertiary
14.3.2. no such thing as innate ideas. we create ideas that stem from experiences. also morals.
14.3.3. we can use reflection as this is an internal sense and not rationality
14.4. Michiel de Montagne
14.4.1. Scepticism. the existence of material reality must be doubted. also, how do we know if a thing resembles a perfect thing in a perfect realm (plato) for we have never been in contact with it. if what we see isn’t the real world, how do we know it resembles the real world at all?
14.5. David Hume, deluded empiricist and positivist
14.5.1. - Impressions --> we experience a thing at this moment - ideas --> we experience a thing trough memory at a later time
14.5.2. copy principle = ideas are copies of impressions
14.5.3. Every complex idea consists of simple ideas and those correspond to impressions
14.5.3.1. you can also form ideas trough blending. this creates an idea that does not derive from experience. Hume never reached this idea tho
14.5.4. we can only sense contiguity, priority and constant conjunction. not the actual cause/necessity.
14.5.4.1. hence, no universal laws. we cannot predict the future form past experience, yet we do. this is because of the human condition, without which, we would not be able to function (believe/act)
14.5.5. no free will. because of constant conjunction of motivation, situation and action, we are predictable.
14.5.5.1. The feeling of free will arises when we explicitly test our will. This is merely the result of ‘a fantastic desire’ to be free.
14.5.6. knowledge is a justified belief. We cannot predict the world, still we do a pretty good job at this. with the use of intuitive induction we are somewhat successful in guessing how things will go and making up laws.
14.6. Immanuel Kant
14.6.1. agrees that we can only see contiguity, priority and constant conjunction.
14.6.2. impossible to have knowledge about metaphysical elements (god, soul, free will)
14.6.3. phenomenal world: the world as it appears to us --> we can have knowledge about this
14.6.4. noumenal world: the world of things as they are --> no knowledge about this
14.6.5. Primordial nebula: the origin of planets. Kant wanted to reason why God existed
14.6.6. Transcendal question: under what circumstance can humans attain knowledge
14.6.7. maths embodies necessity and universality
14.6.8. A priori + Posteriori Analytic judgement + Synthetic judgement