Philosophy Gym

Mark Walker, mwalker@beaconschool.co.uk

1
 Philosophy Gym

WHAT IS A PHILOSOPHICAL QUESTION?

Try this quiz.

1) Which major river flows through Paris?

__________________________________________

2) When was the Battle of Hastings?

__________________________________________

3) Who are known as the ‘Gunners’?

__________________________________________

4) Which type of Christianity is led by the Pope?

__________________________________________

5) Are words ‘real’?

__________________________________________

6) What makes something ‘wet’?

__________________________________________

7) What makes something ‘beautiful’?

__________________________________________

8) A £10000 car is discounted by 25%. What does it cost?

__________________________________________

9) When should people get married?

__________________________________________

10) What is the fruit of the third behind?

__________________________________________

11) Is it ever good to lie?

__________________________________________

2
 Philosophy Gym

Now answer these questions:

a) Are all of the questions on the previous page good ‘quiz questions’? If
not, why not?

b) Which ones can be answered with a single, correct answer?

c) Which ones might be a matter of opinion?

d) Were there any that were not really questions at all?

e) Which ones, do you think, were philosophical questions?

About philosophy…

‘Philosophy’ means ‘love of wisdom’ in Greek. If you are being

philosophical, you are wondering about thoughtful questions, and
trying to understand them better. One philosophical question might
be, for example, “What is wisdom exactly?”. There’s no single
answer; it needs to be discussed or ‘enquired about’. (What would
your answer be?!).

Philosophy is ..
• An attempt to answer unanswerable questions
• The search for rational explanations
• Critical thinking
• Questioning assumptions and prejudices
• A reflective attitude
• ‘It’s not something you study, it’s something you do!

f) Now, can you try and say what philosophical questions have in
common?

g) Think up a philosophical question of your own. Do others agree that it

is philosophical? (Perhaps you need to philosophise about them?!)

3
 Philosophy Gym

Famous Philosophers: Socrates (469-399 BCE)

1) The ‘Godfather’ of philosophy. He lived in Ancient Greece, and was

famous for being brilliant in discussion. He was also famous for being
very ugly!
2) Socrates never wrote any books. He believed that it was through
reasoning and questioning with others that you could arrive at a better
understanding of the world and life. He saw himself as a ‘midwife’ to
truth.
3) He was tough. He was a brave soldier in his early life, enjoyed his
alcohol, and would walk in bare feet even if it was snowing. He died
at the age of seventy; his second child was only a few years old at the
time.
4) Socrates firmly believed in searching for the truth, even if it meant
changing your views or losing an argument. He wanted people to say
what they really thought rather than pretend to hold a view they
didn’t believe in.
5) Socrates never charged for his teaching. He was a famous, but very
modest man. Here are three quotes by him:

“I know that I do not know.”

“A book can answer no questions.”
“An unexamined life is not worth living.”

6) Socrates had a student who went on to be very important in

philosophy; Plato. Plato went on to teach Aristotle, another key figure
in philosophy.
7) Socrates had out-witted many big politicians and public figures in
Athens, and he encouraged people to think for themselves. This
annoyed the Athenian rulers. He was charged with ‘corrupting the
youth of Athens’.
8) During his trial, Socrates made his own impressive defence. However,
he would not back down from what he believed in; the open and free
search for truth.
9) His sentence was death, and he was ordered to drink a deadly poison
called ‘hemlock’. His friends and family gathered round. He drank it
bravely, asking them not to worry or be upset. His last words were “We
owe a cockerel to Aesculapius. Do not forget to repay the debt.”

4
 Philosophy Gym

Some Philosophical Statements – What do you think?

Statement: agree disagree unsure One point to

support a reason
for and against this
belief.
There is no such
thing as evil

Humans are not

different to animals

Plants have
feelings

Numbers don’t
exist when we are
not using them

It is never good to
lie

It is never right to
kill

Knowledge is more
important than
being happy

War is always bad

I am the same
person as I was five
years ago

My mind is the
same thing as my
brain

Things are always

what they seem to
be

I have the
freedom to
choose what I do

5
 Philosophy Gym

Debate: Arguing Effectively

We are going to split up and brainstorm some arguments pro and con for
each position.

Here are the two topics for you to consider –

1. Do animals have rights?

2. Should we bring back Capital Punishment?

First watch the presentation on the ethical issues. Think about:

 Which side are you on?

 What are you reasons?
 How can you persuade someone who disagrees with you?
 What would it take to change YOUR mind?

Now work as a group to produce careful and reasoned arguments, which will
be delivered to the whole class.

Animal Rights

We think that animals do/don’t have rights because …

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

6
 Philosophy Gym

Capital Punishment

We think that Capital Punishment is/is not justified because …

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

After the Debate: Did you hear any points of view that had not occurred to
you? Did you change your mind?

7
 Philosophy Gym

Appearance & Reality

In a recent talk, Elon Musk, the Tesla and SpaceX CEO, gave his views about
reality:

‘Our own video games have

advanced at a rapid pace, from
Pong in the 1970s to immersive
virtual reality today. So given that
we’re clearly on a trajectory to
have games that are
indistinguishable from reality, and
those games could be played on
any set-top box or on a PC or
whatever, and there would
probably be billions of such
computers or set-top boxes, it would seem to follow that the odds that we’re
in base reality is one in billions.’

In other words: it is most likely that we are in fact living inside a computer
game.

It seems absurd at first reading, but Musk’s theory actually comes from a well-
regarded philosopher. Nick Bostrom, a professor at Oxford University,
published his computer simulation argument in 2003. He actually argues that
one of the following three propositions is true:

 Virtually all civilizations at our pace of development will go extinct

before they reach the technological capability of creating ultra-
realistic video games.
 Civilizations with such technological capabilities are uninterested in
running such computer simulations.
 We are almost certainly characters living in a computer simulation.

Bostrom argues: “It’s important to understand that it wouldn’t just be in a

metaphorical sense that we’re in a simulation, it would be in a very literal
sense that we ourselves and all this world around us that we see and hear
and smell exists inside a computer built by some advanced civilization,” he
says.

“The simulation hypothesis could be very good or very bad depending on

what you think the motives of the simulators are—what will happen in the
simulation, what will happen after the simulation ends. There are obviously
both optimistic and pessimistic possibilities for that.”

8
 Philosophy Gym

Bostrom believes it’s entirely possible that conscious characters could be

created inside a computer simulation. Even if it takes hundreds of thousands
of years before such a feat is achieved, his argument still holds. And Bostrom
doesn’t “see an obvious implication for the question of free will.” In other
words, the same questions about agency hold whether we were created by
God, the Big Bang, or an extremely sophisticated teenager on a futuristic
Xbox.

If we’re simulated, does it matter? What do you think? Answer the questions
below and see if you change your mind …

1. Is there a difference between how things seem and how they really are?
For example, is the table I see now the same table that you see? What does
the actual table consist of?

______________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________

2. We believe that we are living in the

‘real world’, the one we see all around
us, but perhaps we are mistaken.
Perhaps that world was destroyed
centuries ago in a terrible war between
man and machines. Now we are all lying
in metal pods with wires protruding from
our bodies as a super-powerful
intelligent computer stimulates our brains
artificially to simulate the world around
us. Can you prove this is not the case?
______________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________

9
 Philosophy Gym

_____________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________

3. ‘Is there any knowledge in the world which is so certain that no reasonable
man [or woman] could doubt it?’ (Bertrand Russell, The Problems of
Philosophy)

______________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________

4. Cogito ergo sum (‘I think therefore I am’) said René Descartes (1596-1650).
What do you think he meant by this?

______________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________

10
 Philosophy Gym

The Fermi Paradox: or “Where is Everyone?”

The Fermi Paradox seeks to answer the question: where are all the aliens?
Given that our star and Earth are part of a young planetary system compared
to the rest of the universe — and that interstellar travel might be fairly easy to
achieve — the theory says that Earth should have been visited by aliens
already. But apparently it hasn’t. So why not?

As the story goes, Enrico Fermi (an Italian physicist) first came out with the
theory with a casual lunchtime remark in 1950. The implications, however,
have had extraterrestrial researchers scratching their heads in the decades
since. "Fermi realized that any civilization with a modest amount of rocket
technology and an immodest amount of imperial incentive could rapidly
colonize the entire galaxy," the Search For Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI)
said on its website."Within ten million years, every star system could be
brought under the wing of empire. Ten million years may sound long, but in
fact it's quite short compared with the age of the galaxy, which is roughly ten
thousand million years. Colonization of the Milky Way should be a quick
exercise."

Plentiful planets

It is true that the universe is incredibly vast and old. One estimate says the
universe spans 92 billion light-years in diameter (while growing faster and
faster). Separate measurements indicate it is about 13.82 billion light-years
old. At first blush, this would give alien civilizations plenty of time to
propagate, but then they would have a cosmic distance barrier to cross
before getting too far into space.

The sheer number of planets that we have found outside of our solar system,
however, indicates that life could be plentiful. A November 2013 study using
data from the Kepler Space Telescope suggested that one in five sun-like
stars has an Earth-size planet orbiting in the habitable region of its star, the
zone where liquid water would be possible. That zone is not necessarily an
indication of life, as other factors, such as the planet's atmosphere, come into
play. Further, "life" could encompass anything from bacteria to starship-sailing
extraterrestrials.

A few months later, Kepler scientists released a "planet bonanza" of 715 newly
discovered worlds, pioneering a new technique called "verification by

11
 Philosophy Gym

multiplicity." The theory essentially postulates that a star that appears to have
multiple objects crossing its face or tugging at it would have planets, as
opposed to stars. (A multiple star system at such close proximity would
destabilize over time, the technique postulates.) Using this will accelerate the
pace of exoplanet discovery, NASA said in 2014.

Our understanding of astrobiology (life in the universe) is just at a beginning,

however. One challenge is these exoplanets are so far away that it is next to
impossible for us to send a probe out to look at them. Another obstacle is
even within our own solar system, we haven't eliminated all the possible
locations for life. We know from looking at Earth that microbes can survive in
extreme temperatures and environments, giving rise to theories that we could
find microbe-like life on Mars, the icy Jovian moon Europa, or perhaps Saturn's
Enceladus or Titan. All of this together means that even within our own Milky
Way Galaxy — the equivalent of the cosmic neighborhood — there should
be many Earth-size planets in habitable zones that could host life. But what
are the odds of these worlds having starfarers in their bounds?

Life: plentiful, or rare?

The odds of intelligent life are estimated in the Drake Equation, which seeks to
figure out the number of civilizations in the Milky Way that seek to
communicate with each other. The equation is written as:

N = R* • fp • ne • fl • fi • fc • L

 N = The number of civilizations in the Milky Way galaxy whose

electromagnetic emissions are detectable.
 R* = The rate of formation of stars suitable for the development of
intelligent life.
 fp = The fraction of those stars with planetary systems.
 ne = The number of planets, per solar system, with an environment
suitable for life.
 fl = The fraction of suitable planets on which life actually appears.
 fi = The fraction of life bearing planets on which intelligent life emerges.
 fc = The fraction of civilizations that develop a technology that
releases detectable signs of their existence into space.
 L = The length of time such civilizations release detectable signals into
space.

None of these values are known with any certainty right now, which makes
predictions difficult for astrobiologists and extraterrestrial communicators alike.
There is another possibility that would dampen the search for radio signals or
alien spacecraft, however: that there is no life in the universe besides our
own. While SETI's Frank Drake and others suggested there could be 10,000
civilizations seeking communications in the galaxy, a 2011 study later
published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
suggested that Earth could be a rare bird among planets. It took at least 3.5
billion years for intelligent life to evolve, the theory by Princeton University
researchers David Spiegel and Edwin Turner said, which indicates it takes a lot

12
 Philosophy Gym

of time and luck for this to happen. Other explanations for the Fermi paradox
include:

13
 Philosophy Gym

Fermi Paradox Assignment:

Are we alone in the universe? Yes or No – What do YOU think?

___________________________________________

Say why – What are your reasons?

_____________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________

How might you persuade someone who didn’t agree with you? What
arguments can you muster to support your opinion?

_____________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________

Now share your ideas with the class …

14
Philosophy Gym

15
 Philosophy Gym

Paradoxes of Time Travel

In the movie The Terminator, a

murderous cyborg called the
Terminator travels backwards
in time from the future in order
to kill a young boy who is
destined to become the last
human resistance leader
against the rule of intelligent
machines.

But the Terminator is wasting

his time – he’s doomed to fail. Or is he? Can you think of a reason why his
plan won’t work?

_____________________________________________

_____________________________________________

_____________________________________________

_____________________________________________

_____________________________________________

In the movie Back to the Future, Marty McFly travels to

the past and accidentally prevents his own parents
from meeting. Can you think of a reason why this might
be impossible?

__________________________________________

__________________________________________

__________________________________________

__________________________________________

_____________________________________________

In both the movies mentioned, the problem of Time Travel Paradoxes arises.

16
 Philosophy Gym

What is a Paradox?

-- “a statement or proposition which, despite sound (or apparently sound)

reasoning from acceptable premises, leads to a conclusion that seems
logically unacceptable or self-contradictory.”

Time Travel

There is nothing in Einstein’s theories of relativity to rule out time travel,

although the very notion of traveling to the past violates one of the most
fundamental premises of physics, that of causality. With the laws of cause
and effect out the window, there naturally arises a number of inconsistencies
associated with time travel, and listed here are some of those paradoxes
which have given both scientist and time travel movie buffs alike more than a
few sleepless nights over the years.

Some Classic Paradoxes of Time Travel:

1: Predestination Paradox

This occurs when the actions of a person travelling back in time ultimately
causes the event he is trying to prevent to occur. Imagine, for example, that
your best friend dies in a hit-and-run car accident, and you travel back in
time to save them from that fate, only to find that on your way to the
accident you are the one who accidentally runs them over!

2: Bootstrap Paradox

This occurs when an object, person, or piece of information sent back in time
results in an infinite loop where the object has no discernible origin, and exists
without ever being created. For example, George Lucas travelling back in
time and giving himself the scripts for the first Star Wars movie which he then
goes on to direct and gain great fame for would create a bootstrap paradox
involving information, as the scripts have no true point of creation or origin.

3: Grandfather Paradox

Let’s say you, the time traveller, decide to kill your grandfather before he ever
met your grandmother. This time paradox gives rise to a ‘self-inconsistent
solution’, because if you travelled to the past and killed your grandfather, you
would never have been born and would not have been able to travel to the
past.

17
 Philosophy Gym

4: Let’s Kill Hitler Paradox

Similar to the Grandfather Paradox which paradoxically prevents your own

birth, the Killing Hitler paradox erases your own reason for going back in time
to kill him. Furthermore, while killing Grandpa might have a limited “butterfly
effect”, killing Hitler would have far-reaching consequences for everyone in
the world, even if only for the fact you studied him in school. The paradox
itself arises from the idea that if you were successful, then there would be no
reason to time travel in the first place. If you killed Hitler then none of his
actions would trickle down through history and cause you to want to make
the attempt.

Possible Solutions

Scientists eager to avoid the paradoxes presented by time travel have come
up with a number of ingenious ways in which to present a more consistent
version of reality, some of which have been touched upon here, including:

–The Solution: time travel is impossible because of the very paradox it creates.

–Self-healing hypothesis: successfully altering events in the past will set off
another set of events which will cause the present to remain the same.

–The Multiverse or “many-worlds” hypothesis: an alternate parallel universe or

timeline is created each time an event is altered in the past.

–Erased timeline hypothesis: a person traveling to the past would exist in the
new timeline, but have their own timeline erased.

18
 Philosophy Gym

Ethics: The Trolley Problem

Imagine you are standing beside some tram tracks. In the distance, you spot
a runaway trolley hurtling down the tracks towards five workers who cannot
hear it coming. Even if they do spot it, they won’t be able to move out of the
way in time. As this disaster looms, you glance down and see a lever
connected to the tracks. You realise that if you pull the lever, the tram will be
diverted down a second set of tracks away from the five unsuspecting
workers. However, down this side track is one lone worker, just as oblivious as
his colleagues. So, would you pull the lever, leading to one death but saving
five?

What would you do? Give your reasons here:

_____________________________________________

_____________________________________________

_____________________________________________

_____________________________________________

19
 Philosophy Gym

A Different Scenario … or is it?

Now imagine you are standing on a footbridge above the tram tracks. You
can see the runaway trolley hurtling towards the five unsuspecting workers,
but there’s no lever to divert it. However, there is large man standing next to
you on the footbridge. You’re confident that his bulk would stop the tram in its
tracks.

So, would you push the man on to the tracks, sacrificing him in order to stop
the tram and thereby saving five others?

Now what would you do? Tell us what and why here:

_____________________________________________

_____________________________________________

_____________________________________________

____________________________________________________

____________________________________________________

Finally, consider this question: Is there any difference between KILLING and
LETTING DIE? How does the Trolley Problem help us consider this question?

_____________________________________________

_____________________________________________

_____________________________________________

_____________________________________________

____________________________________________________

20
 Philosophy Gym

The Experience Machine: Thought Experiment

Imagine if you will that scientists have come up with an amazing new
technology called the Experience Machine. It works like this:

You go into the lab and sit down with the staff and talk to them about
everything you’ve ever wanted to do in life—you describe your perfect, most
ideal, most pleasurable, most joyous, most satisfying possible life. Then they
induce you into a coma that you’ll never emerge from. They put your
unconscious body into a tank of fluid in a pitch black room and cover your
head with electrodes.

Once you’re in the tank, the simulation begins. You’ll experience everything
you said you dreamed of, for the duration of your life (or what can feel like a
lot longer if you choose), and you’ll have no memory of going into the
experience machine or knowledge that your world is only a simulation. You
will experience your perfect life in its entirety, exactly as if it really happened—
but in reality, none of it is real and you’re actually floating in a vat of fluid in a
pitch black room. You’ll never again wake up to experience the actual world
or interact with actual people, but you won’t know that, and you’ll feel like
you did.

The question is: If the experience machine were available to you and
guaranteed to work flawlessly, would you do it?

If not, why not?

And how about this – how can you be sure you are not already plugged in to
just such a machine?

____________________________________________________

____________________________________________________

____________________________________________________

____________________________________________________

____________________________________________________

____________________________________________________

____________________________________________________

____________________________________________________

21
 Philosophy Gym

What’s wrong with the following arguments?

 All monkeys are green. Peter is green. Therefore, Peter is a

monkey.

_____________________________________________

_____________________________________________

 All men are human beings. All women are human beings.
Therefore all women are men.

_____________________________________________

_____________________________________________

 I have a one in six chance of rolling a six on a single six-sided

dice. I’ve rolled the dice four times now without seeing the six.
So it’s very likely that I’ll roll a six this time or the next.

_____________________________________________

_____________________________________________

 A murderous cyborg called the Terminator travels backwards in

time from the future in order to kill a young boy who is destined
to become the last human resistance leader against the rule of
the machines. But the cyborg is wasting his time – he’s doomed
to fail. Or is he?

_____________________________________________

_____________________________________________

 The Premier League has better footballers than the First

Division. The Premier League is far wealthier so it stands to
reason it must have better players.

_____________________________________________

_____________________________________________

22
 Philosophy Gym

 I believe that Brand X washes whiter than Brand Y, because a

minor TV celebrity told me so in an advert for Brand X.

_____________________________________________

_____________________________________________

 John is honest. How do I know? Because Jane told me. How do

I know that Jane is honest? Because John told me.

_____________________________________________

_____________________________________________

 Britain is a wealthy country, therefore this British tourist must

be wealthy, so I’ll charge him double for his taxi fare – he can
afford it can’t he?

_____________________________________________

_____________________________________________

 If John is happy, then John is playing football. John is playing

football. Therefore John is happy.

_____________________________________________

_____________________________________________

 Marty McFly travels back in time in a Delorean sports car which

has been converted into a time machine. Back in the 1950s he
accidentally prevents his own youthful parents from meeting
and falling in love.

_____________________________________________

_____________________________________________

The Ship – A Philosophical Story

23
 Philosophy Gym

Angus and Freddie cycled along Salamander Street, which turned into
Baltic Street, which turned into Bernard Street. They were in Leith looking for
Victoria Dock, where a square-rigged sailing ship was supposed to be tied up.
Suddenly Angus caught sight of something that looked like the mast of
a sailing ship.
That's it!' he shouted to Freddie.
'You're right,' Freddie shouted back, excitedly; 'but how do we get to
it?'
The tip of the mast could be seen over a large warehouse that stood
behind a high fence. The boys couldn't find a way in.
'Oh, look,' said Freddie suddenly, pointing to an open gate; 'I think we
can get to the dock through there.'
The boys cycled through the gate and along a deserted road until, all
of a sudden, there was the tall ship, tied up in a small harbour next to a
double-decker bus. When they got closer to the bus, they saw it served as a
ticket office, where they could buy tickets to board the ship and look around.
The ship, 'Maria Magdalena' was her name, had been sailing around
the British Isles. At each port the crew welcomed visitors aboard, so long as
the visitors bought tickets in the double-decker bus. When the ship set sail for
the next port, the bus followed along by land, met her when she arrived in
port, and sold more tickets to more visitors.
Freddie and Angus bought their tickets and then spent the afternoon
happily looking around the Maria Magdalena.
At the dinner table that evening Freddie was asked to tell his family
what he and Angus had seen in Leith Harbour. He was still very excited, but
not too excited to tell them about the tall masts, the endless rigging, the cosy
cabins, the small bunks where the crew slept and, of course, the double-
decker bus, where you buy tickets to board the ship.
'It's a very beautiful ship,' Freddie explained; 'it's all gleaming white. It's
like a ship in a movie. In fact, it has been used in making pirate films.'
'Did you say how old the ship is?' asked Freddie's father.
'I think the guide said it was built about 1840, or something,' replied
Freddie; 'but only a few years later it got sunk, in a big battle. It stayed on the
ocean bottom for years and years. Then, about two years ago, it was
salvaged, brought up from the bottom. It's now the oldest sailing ship afloat.'
'Really!' put in Freddie's mother; 'then it must be quite dilapidated.'
'Oh, no!' Freddie assured her; 'not at all. The guide told us that when
they brought it up... uh, brought her up.' Freddie suddenly remembered that
ships are considered feminine -- they found that much of the decking was
rotten. So they replaced most of that, board by board. Then they found that
some of the ribs were rotten, too; so they replaced them. Finally, they got
worried about the sides, you know, the outside of the hull. They ended up
replacing much of that as well, one board at a time. Now almost all the
boards on the ship are new, and very smooth, and solid, and well painted.
She's a beautiful ship.'
'Then it can't be the oldest sailing ship afloat,' sneered Alice, ignoring
the rule about calling ships 'her'; 'it can't be, if almost all the boards are new.
It's a new ship. It may be modelled after an old ship, but it's a new ship.'
Freddie was stunned. He had been imagining the battles the Maria
Magdalena had fought. He had been wondering what the sailors who had

24
 Philosophy Gym

sailed her were like and what it would have been like to be a cabin boy on
the ship when she had set sail for the Far East. He had been so proud to be
standing on the deck of a ship that had sailed so long ago.
Now it seemed to Freddie that Alice was right. The ship he and Angus
had boarded in Leith Harbour, the ship the guide had said was the oldest
sailing ship afloat, wasn't really; she was only a copy of the Maria Magdalena.
No, she wasn't exactly a copy either. She was something the Maria
Magdalena had . . . sort of . . . turned into . . . a new ship the old ship had
turned into.
But the guide had said she was the oldest square-rigger afloat. Freddie
was sure of that. Was the guide wrong then?

* * *

The problem of the Ship

Is the ship that consists entirely of replacement parts still the same ship?

At a time T, we have the original Ship A

At a later time T1, we have Ship B consisting entirely of replacement
parts
Is Ship B the same as Ship A?

Another problem:

Now consider further that every time a plank or other part from the original
was removed, that old part was carefully stored in a warehouse. Once every
single original part is available in the warehouse they are reassembled to form
another ship. We now seem to have two ships with rival claims to being the
original – the ship consisting of replacement parts, and the reassembled ship.
Both cannot be the same ship, can they?

At time T1, Ship C is reassembled from the original parts.

But it cannot be that both B = A and C = A
Does the existence of Ship C change the relationship of B to A?
What do you think? Can you decide which ship is the ‘real’ one?

The Problem of Personal Identity

Now think about the analogy between an artefact, such as a ship, and a
living organism, such as a human being.

This body is me. But body parts can be lost and identity retained. We replace
all our physical constituents roughly every seven years, so how do we remain
the same person? Is our identity dependent on the whole body or just a part
of it or none of it at all?

Why might it be important to establish that you are indeed the same person
you were seven years ago? I must be the same person I was when I

25
 Philosophy Gym

committed the crime in order to be held responsible. Can you think of any
other reasons?

Star Trek transporter scenarios:

How does the transporter on the Starship Enterprise work?

(1) atoms disassembled and transported in bits then reassembled at other

end.

(2) body destroyed and reconstructed at the destination from other atoms.

Both scenarios present problems. Are we nothing more than atoms that can
be taken apart and reassembled?

Your challenge:

Write an essay that summarises the problems discussed above and tries to
provide some solutions. At the end of your essay imagine that you are on the
Starship Enterprise – What do you think happens to people who are
transported? Would you agree to get in the transporter? Give your reasons
either way?

The title of your essay should be: Philosophical Problems of Identity

26
 Philosophy Gym

Zeno’s Paradoxes

A paradox is a type of argument that leads to an apparent contradiction.

These Ancient Greek arguments are intended to demonstrate that
movement of any kind is actually impossible!

1. The Race Course, or paradox of the half-distances. A runner has to run from
one end of a course to the other. To complete the whole course he must first
complete half the distance. To complete the half distance, he must first
complete half the distance of that half. To complete half the distance of the
second half, he must first complete half its distance, and so on ad infinitum.
How can he ever get to the end of the racecourse?

2. Achilles & the Tortoise. A race is on between swift Achilles and a slow
tortoise. Achilles graciously gives the tortoise a head start: he starts at point A,
the tortoise further along the racecourse at point B. By the time Achilles has
moved from A to B, the tortoise has also moved (albeit much more slowly)
from point B to C. By the time Achilles reaches point C, the tortoise is at point
D, just a little bit further on. Every time Achilles attempts to close the gap the
tortoise has moved on. There are going to be an infinite number of such gaps
to close before Achilles catches up. But it’s impossible to complete an infinite
series of anything, so Achilles will never catch the tortoise. Or will he?

3. The Arrow. How can a flying arrow ever move from one place to another?
At time t1 the arrow is in position p1. To get to position p2 the arrow has to
move from p1. But in position p1 at time t1 the arrow occupies a space
exactly equal to itself. Objects at rest occupy a space exactly equal to their
own dimensions, just as the arrow in that instant of time. Therefore the arrow
too must be at rest, even in mid-flight. How can it ever move?

Your challenge: What is wrong with these arguments? How can you
challenge their conclusions?

27