LOS PRESOCRÁTICOS (LOS PADRES DE LA FILOSOFÍA ANTES QUE HUBIERA FILOSOFÍA)

What is the fundamental "stuff" (arche) of the universe?

The crucial feature of pre-Socratic philosophy was the use of reason to explain the universe. The philosophers shared the intuition that there was a single explanation that could explain both the plurality and the singularity of the whole. For some reason, they believed this fundamental stuff of the universe was univocal.

They called it archë.

MILESIAN SCHOOL (born in Miletus)

Anaximander (610-546 BC), a geometer and the first writer on philosophy. He came up with the idea of apeiron , i.e., an undefined, unlimited substance without qualities, out of which the primary opposites. 

Thales of Miletus:  (of the Milesian school) Thales claims that the world rests on water with the view that water is the archē or fundamental principle, and he adds that “that from which they come to be is a principle of all things.” He suggests that Thales chose water because of its fundamental role in coming-to-be, nutrition, and growth and claims that water is the origin of the nature of moist things. archë is water because, as a substance, it contains motion and change.

Heraclitus: The universe is a state of perpetual flux, connected by logical structure or pattern, which he termed logos.

Xenophanes: comes up with the notion of pephuke (explanation), which states that X is really Y when Y reveals the true character of X. 

Pythagoras: the notion that NUMBER (or mathematics) reveals the structure of the universe.

ELEATIC SCHOOL (born in Elea)

Parmenides is the father of metaphysics and rationalism.  His theory is that what IS CANNOT NOT BE. 

So, BEING (NOUS) is UNCHANGING.  For something to change, it has to NOT BE, which is a contradiction because NOTHING cannot exist, and out of nothing, nothing comes.

Atomist School

The Atomists: Leucippus (5th BC) and his pupil Democritus of Abdera (460-370 BC) from Thrace. the arche are atoms: small primary bodies, infinite in number, indivisible and imperishable, qualitatively similar, but distinguished by their shapes. They move eternally through the infinite void. They collide and unite, thus generating objects that differ in accordance with the varieties in number, size, shape, etc. We are ALL atoms.

The Pluralist School

Empedocles: comes up with the principle of attraction and rejection, or LOVE and STRIFE. One cannot be without the other. Love unites, strife separates.

PHILOSOPHY AND ITS BRANCHES

LOGIC: The study of correct thinking. Su objeto no es qué pensamos, sino cómo pensamos y bajo qué condiciones un razonamiento puede considerarse válido.

Example: "A triangle has four sides". THIS IS NOT TRUE. 

"If it rains, the streets are wet. It rained, therefore the streets are wet" . THIS IS INVALID. 

AXIOLOGY: the study of value. 

What is value? Think of something in terms of good or bad, i.e., 

"I hate broccoli." "I love R&B." "I hate roaches." "What she did to her sister was wrong." "My grandma's chicken soup is still the best." I'm not crazy about Picasso's art."

Without axiology, imagine what law, food, art, economy, and human relationships would be. 

An essential question at this point is whether the value we posit is objective or subjective. In other words,

Is Catena Malbec 2014 good because I lived in Argentina, or am I Argentinian, instead of the juice in the bottle?

Or....

When we say "Slavery is wrong," are we talking about now, 2017, or any time in the past or the future?

Axiology is divided into two:

ETHICS: evaluating human actions, i.e., right and wrong conduct.

Ponder this: What makes an action right?

the action's results
the action's intentions
the emotive responses towards the action
the action itself
what (people, society, culture) think of it 

Keywords: right, wrong.

AESTHETICS is the study of value in the arts or the inquiry into feelings, judgments, or beauty standards and related concepts.

What makes something beautiful, ugly, elegant, awful, attractive, charming, clumsy, mysterious, etc?
Are aesthetic properties objective, subjective, or inter-subjective?

Keywords: beautiful, ugly, amazing (sublime).

Ponder this: Is the sunset beautiful if no one sees it? or better, is there unseen beauty, majesty?
See that though we didn't witness the Big Bang, the idea of such an event has given physicists plenty to talk about. We've seen simulations of it in the movies.

EPISTEMOLOGY: the study of knowledge.

Epistemology investigates the origin, structure, methods, and integrity of knowledge.

How much do we actually know? More importantly, Is our knowledge warranted?

What is the difference between belief and knowledge?

Do I hold false beliefs?

Keywords: belief, truth, justification, explanation.

METAPHYSICS: the study of what is really real. This is heavy.  We're dealing here with principles. The question in metaphysics is the existence status of any kind of stuff.

Consider the truths of mathematics: how is it that a triangle exists? Are points, lines, or planes really real?

What is a soul?

Under what conditions are these entities possible?

Keywords: identity, change, being, necessity, accident, category, etc. 

WHAT IS PHILOSOPHY? PRESENTED BY HANK GREEN

Click here for more information.

TEXTBOOK

 Click here for our textbook. 

¿Qué gano con estudiar filosofía? Philosophy es #1 en "analytic", "verbal" y "composite" para el GRE, LSAT and LGMAT (y el salario no es malo)

click here for more information,

Phi 2010 Honors, Syllabus, Fall 2025

Alfredo Triff, PhD. 

Escéptico, hedonista, tradicionalista, cocinero, tutor, fumador de pipa y ailurófilo. 😎

Correo electrónico: atriff@mdc.edu 

Texto: Philosophy Here and Now, by Lewis Vaughn (Fourth Edition). 

Objetivos 

* Familiarizarse con las tendencias contemporáneas en la filosofía. 

* Comprender el proceso de formación de creencias y cómo combatir prejuicios propios. 

* La importancia de la verdad filosófica sobre los supuestos políticamente correctos. 

* Cómo estimular la curiosidad y la perseverancia. 

* La dinámica del diálogo y la discusión. 

* Filosofía para la vida. ☝ 

Evaluación 

1. Las calificaciones "A", "B" y "C" representan sobresaliente, bueno y promedio, respectivamente. "D" está por debajo del promedio. "F" significa que no hay suficiente trabajo para justificar el crédito por el curso. 

2. Aquí el desglose final: 2 exámenes, parcial y final cada uno 20 puntos + alrededor de 12 tareas (20 puntos), trabajo final (15 puntos) + asistencia (25 puntos). Este desglose representa una aproximación cualitativa (mis calificaciones son algo curvas). 

3. La asistencia es obligatoria. Tomo asistencia al comienzo de cada clase. Si un estudiante no responde, significa ausente. Si el estudiante entra en el aula después de que la clase haya comenzado, significa tarde. Asuntos de tardanza se tratan SÓLO al final de la clase. 

Desglose de material 

Capítulo 1: La filosofía (introducción): metafísica, lógica, condiciones de necesidad y suficiencia.

Capítulo 6: Epistemología 

Capítulo 4: Filosofía de la mente y el cuerpo 

Capítulo 5: Libre albedrío y determinismo 

Midterm Exam

Capítulo 3: La vida moral 

Capítulo 8: La sociedad justa 

Capítulo 2: Dios y la religión 

Final exam

Final Paper

 I reserve the right to change the order or chapters, provided I let you know in advance. 

Homework 7 (ETHICS, CHAPTER)

 click here for more information.

chapter 3, ETHICS, fall 2024

let's start with this video,

click here for my intro to moral norms,

what are defensible moral judgments?

click here for my lectures on ethics,

Philosophy paper (second assignment)

 click here for more information

Homework #6 (Capítulo 5)

 Pincha aquí. 

Lista de Estudiantes Asistentes

María Cetino

José Guizán

Daniela Fonseca

Nicole Leithof

Amarillis Rubido

Ariana Tacher

Samantha Tang

Ricardo Uzcátegui

Augusto Valero

Topics for review midterm exam (2024)

Chapter 1 y Capitulo 6

Chapter 4 

Chapter 5 (From Hard determinism to Libertarianism)

 Pincha aquí. 

Paper proposal (first assignment) due october 17

 click here for more information.

this is a good video to continue our discussion on chapter 4 (philosophy of mind)

 click here.

you need good counters to have a good philosophy paper

click here for more information,

Topics for your philosophy paper

 Click here for more information.

Law of unintended consequences

 click here.

Capítulo 4 (Philosophy of Mind)

 Click here for more information. 

La invasión del "fake" research (o por qué debemos considerar lo "fake" como una parte del todo)

 Climate scientist admits to overhyping research to get published (in the Telegraph)

Are you surprised? 😂

Let's do a bit of Philosophy of statistics. 

I remember Professor Barr's adage in my Statistical Analysis class: if you find two compelling reasons for a mistake (outside the research), it's not a mistake. 

What an error in statistics?

Observational error (or Measurement error) is the difference between a measured value of a quantity and its true value. In statistics, an error is not necessarily a "mistake." 

The reason is that variability is an inherent part of the results of measurement processes. 

Measurement errors can be divided into two: random and systematic. 

Random errors are errors in measurement that lead to inconsistent measurable values when repeated measurements of a constant attribute or quantity are taken (errors can get repeated even if looking for proof)

Systematic errors are not determined by chance but are introduced by repeatable processes inherent to the system. 

Put differently, the house would lose if randomness was true.

A systematic error is not determined by chance but by a repeatable process inherent to the system. In gambling parlance, Casino bias is part of the game; otherwise, the House loses! 

Now, is complete randomness REAL? Some think not. 

If not, how do you argue?

Mi salsa de tomate (muy importante)

 Pincha aquí.

why is 7+5 =12 synthetic apriori?

find the answer here.

Homework #4 Epistemology

 click here for more information.

Chapter 6: Epistemology

Epistemology's main characters,

A brief history of epistemology, 

Some necessary epistemological concepts,

A PBS video to help you see these ideas,

Criteria of adequacy of scientific theories (importante)

The features of what distinguishes a good theory from a bad one:

1. Consistency: Lack of internal contradictions.

2. Simplicity: Quality of relying on only a small number of assumptions.

3. Scope: The amount of diverse phenomena observed.

4. Conservatism: Quality of fitting well with existing theories.

5. Fruitfulness: The number of new facts predicted of problems solved.

Some excellent Math texts I recommend

Tom Apostol Vol. 1,  & Volume 2, (PDF) for Calculus 1, 2 & 3.  

Advanced Calculus (PDF), by Lynn Loomis and Schlomo Sternberg.

A great Linear Algebra Introduction (PDF).

Intro to Abstract Algebra, by Michael Artin (2nd Edition).

Differential Equations, PDF, by Paul Blanchard.

Applied Partial Differential Equations, PDF, David Logan. 

Introduction to Set Theory PDF, by Herbert Enderton, PDF.

Logical and causal possibility (think of mind experiments)

Logical Possiblity:

Something is logically possible if and only if it violates a law of logic. 

Here is one logical possibility: "President J. F. Kennedy was not killed by Larry Oswald in Texas on November 22, 1963." 

He was indeed killed that day. So, why is it still logically possible? There's no contradiction in assuming Larry Oswald missed his shot or that Kennedy was hurt but survived. 

Causal Possibility:

Something is causally possible if it does not violate law of nature.

Law of non-contradiction: 

Nothing can have and lack property at the same time. 

Examples: "A triangle of four sides," "2 + 2 = 5", "A married bachelor," etc.

Conceivability: 

1. If p is conceivable, it is imaginable (imagination is a mental faculty linked to rationality). An example of that is mind experiments in physics and math. 

Is Superman logically possible? The first step in the evidence that p is possible is to be able to conceive it. Just that. 

We say p is conceivable if its implication can be drawn without it being contradictory, i.e., 

Can Superman be conceived? 

Yes, that's why we talk about him and can even watch him in a movie. 

Now, Clearly, not everything that is conceivable is possible. For example, Superman, dragons, gremlins, and succubi are all conceivable but not possible. 

Why not?  They violate laws of nature.

Remember: If p is conceivable, then from 2. It's logically possible. 

finally,

3. p is causally possible if it doesn't violate a law of nature.  

Now, let's talk a little bit about LAWS OF NATURE: 

Laws differ from scientific theories in that they do not posit a mechanism or explanation of phenomena; they are merely distillations of the results of repeated observation. 

A law's applicability is limited to circumstances resembling those already observed, and the law may be found to be false when extrapolated. 

How do logical possibility (LP) and causal possibility (CP) relate?

If something is logically impossible, it is causally impossible.

If something is causally possible, it is logically possible. 

LI → CI
CP → LP

Clearly, LI is sufficient for CI. Is it necessary? It would be if CI cannot exist without LI. Let's pursue this point further.

Something cannot be and not be at the same time. 

But time is a causal variable, not a logical one. If time is outside us, then "same time" is sort of cheating for a logical category. 

Logic is aprioristic. And yet, Kant has argued that time is not outside. Of course, being a physicist, you will swear that time is outside since you can work with it mathematically. But that doesn't contradict Kant's point (though we don't have time to pursue that here).

¿Qué es un experimento mental? (mind experiment)

DEF: The description of a possible situation in which a concept should apply or a condition should be met if the theory in question is true.

Es decir, un experimento mental es un recurso de la imaginación empleado para investigar la naturaleza de las cosas. La mente es el laboratorio del filósofo. Mind experiments nos ayudan a ver concebir las condiciones de posibilidad de las cosas.

Varias teorías o posturas filosóficas se fundan en los resultados de experimentos mentales: 

el dilema del tranvía,  en ética,

la tabla de Carneades, en ética,

la habitación china,  en filosofía de la mente,

la tierra gemela, en filosofía del lenguaje, 

el cerebro en una cubeta y...

el cuarto de Mary en filosofía de la mente.

Homework #3 (causation & fallacies)

 click here for more information.

¿Qué es la verdad?

En clase les he dicho que la verdad es complicada. Y lo es, pero eso no significa que la filosofía no haya definido el concepto de verdad.

En general tenemos tres definiciones: 

1. Correspondence Theory of Truth (la verdad como correspondencia), 

A proposition is true by its correspondence with reality.  

Ejemplo: Un vertebrado es un animal que tiene un esqueleto con columna vertebral y cráneo, y cuyo sistema nervioso central está formado por la médula espinal y el encéfalo.

2. The Coherence Theory of Truth (la verdad como coherencia con lo que ya se cree).

Truth is what best coheres with our existing knowledge. 

Ejemplo: En cosmología, se entiende por Big Bang,​ o Gran Explosión,​ al comienzo del universo, es decir, el punto inicial en el que se formó la materia, el espacio y el tiempo. 

3. The Pragmatic Theory of Truth (la verdad pragmática).

Truth is, whatever best does the job at hand.  

Ejemplo: El cuadro Guernica de Picasso es una obra maestra de la pintura del siglo XX.