¿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 y 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.

Here is an example of how to build a mind experiment.

Lista de algunos paradigmas científicos que han cambiado

 pincha aquí.

Cause and effect can betray even the smartest amongst us!

When is C a cause of E?

Take this simple example: Pluto's barking causes Dick to wake up.

We need four steps:

1. The cause must precede the effect,

2. It's nearly impossible for the cause to happen and the effect not to happen. Another way of saying it: if the cause had not happened, the effect would not have happened. 

3. The cause makes a difference, (without the cause, there's no effect),
4. There's no common cause,   Think of a person suffering from depression. You could frame their depression using the common-cause relationship as well. Depression leads to a lack of motivation AND a lack of appetite.

   
So, we have:

1. The barking precedes Dick's waking up, 
2. It's nearly impossible for Pluto to bark and Dick not to wake up,

3. Without the barking, there's no waking up, 
4. Suppose both the barking and waking up are caused by a person jumping Dick's fence and making a noise which causes Pluto to bark and Dick to wake up. 

Necessary, sufficient, and contributory causes:

Pluto's barking is a necessary cause of Dick's waking up if the barking precedes the waking, but it doesn't imply the latter will occur, i.e., Dick may not wake up (it's not guaranteed).      

Pluto's barking is a sufficient cause of Dick's waking up if the the barking necessarily imply the waking, although another cause may also contribute to Dick's waking (noise coming from the bathroom where Dick's wife was taking a shower). Here the presence of the waking doesn't guarantee the prior occurrence of the barking.

A cause is a contributory cause if it's one among several co-occurrent causes. In general, there is no implication that a contributory cause is necessary, though it may be so.

Reciprocally, a contributory cause is not sufficient for the effect, because it is by definition accompanied by other causes, which would not count as causes if they are sufficient, for your information, most causes are contributory, i.e., there are more than one. 

Want one paramount example of contributory causation? 

 

Climate change, with all its contributory causes: sun, orbital variations of the earth, low cloud cover, oceans, albedo effect, man-made C0₂, etc.

REMEMBER, VERY IMPORTANT...

CORRELATION DOESN'T MEAN CAUSATION

Deductive and Inductive arguments

PREMISE:

A premise is a reason given.

ARGUMENT:

An argument is a set of premises and a conclusion.

DEDUCTIVE ARGUMENTS

An argument is a set of premises and a conclusion. Look at this argument:

"Socrates is a man"  first premise
"Men are mortal"    second premise
________
"Socrates is mortal" conclusion

Now, there are deductive and inductive arguments.

Deductive argument are “truth preserving”, because the truth of its premises guarantees the truth of its conclusion.

Deductive arguments can be valid or invalid. If VALID, then the conclusion necessarily follows from the premises (even if the premises were false).

"Socrates is a man" (T)
"Men are mortal"    (T)
________
"Socrates is mortal"  (T)

the above argument is valid. in addition the premises are true. if the argument is VALID and its premises true, the conclusion must be true. we call this kind of argument SOUND. 

now let's play a bit with truth values:

"Socrates is a man"  (T)
"Men are immortal" (F)
__________
"Socrates is immortal" (F)

the above argument IS VALID, i.e, though the conclusion follows from the premises, though one premise is false. We have a false premise and a false conclusion, yet the above argument is VALID, but UNSOUND

See that deduction is independent from experience beause the reasoning is self contained in the premises. Remember that the premises could be false and the argument still be valid. 

DEDUCTION IS APRIORISTIC. MATHEMATICS IS AN EXAMPLE OF AN APRIORISTIC DISCIPLINE. 

______________

INDUCTIVE ARGUMENTS:

An inductive argument establishes a conclusion with a high degree of probability. Here the truth of their premises does not guarantee the truth of their conclusion.

Every windstorm observed so far in this area comes from the north. We can see a big cloud of dust in the distance. So, a new windstorm is probably coming from the north.

Analysis: The above argument is a strong inductive argument. The "so far" in the premise is simple and cautious, and the conclusion uses "probably."  

Strong inductive arguments establish the conclusion with high probability IF the premises were true.

 

If the argument is not STRONG, then it is WEAK.

THRE ARE THREE KINDS OF INDUCTIVE ARGUMENTS: 

Inductive generalization: It goes from a premise about a sample to a conclusion about the population, or it derives general principles from specific observations.  Click here for a good explanation of inductive generalizations.

Analogical Induction: The process of analogical inference involves noting the shared properties of two or more things and from this basis, inferring that they also share some further property:

Example:
 

Athenians and spartans are similar with respect to speaking the same language & being Pantheists
An Athenian has been observed to have further property X
Therefore, a Spartan probably also has property X.

Click here for examples of analogical induction.

Enumerative Induction: It reasons from particular instances to all instances. 

Example: If one observes 100 swans, and all 100 are white, one might infer "All swans are white." 

 

(As you can see, even if the premises are true, it does not entail the conclusion's truth. The conclusion might be true, and probably true, yet it can be false).

Click here for examples of enumerative induction.

Inference to the best explanation IBE: 

Phenomenon Q.

E provides the best explanation for Q.

Therefore, it is probable that E is true.

________________

As you can see, a big difference between deduction and induction is that the latter depends from experience. 

INDUCTION IS BASICALLY A POSTERIORI. 

SO, WE CAN SAY THAT SCIENTIFIC THEORIES ARE A POSTERIORI, NEVER ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN.

Necessary and sufficient conditions

Necessary conditions:

X is a necessary condition for Y, 

if X is not present, Y doesn't happen.

(yet, to say that X is a necessary condition for Y does not mean that X guarantees Y)

Having gasoline in my car (gasoline engine cars) is a necessary condition for my car to start. Yet,  having gasoline in the car does not guarantee that my car will start. There are many other conditions needed for my car to start.

Having oxygen in the earth's atmosphere is a necessary condition for human life. However, having oxygen will not guarantee human life. There are many other conditions needed for human life other than oxygen in the atmosphere.


Sufficient conditions:

X is a sufficient condition for Y,

if X is present, Y happens (X guarantees Y)

Rain pouring from the sky is a sufficient condition for the ground to be wet (not necessary, since the ground could be wet for other reasons).
______

Test yourself: 

*Is sunlight a necessary or sufficient condition for the flowers to bloom?

*Is earning a final grade of C a necessary or sufficient condition for passing the course?

*Is being a male a necessary or sufficient condition for being a father?

*Is having AIDS a necessary or sufficient condition for having the HIV virus?

*Is studying for a test a necessary or sufficient condition for passing a test?

*Is completing all the requirements of your degree program a necessary or sufficient condition for earning your degree?