Senior High School

Introduction
to the Philosophy
of the Human Person
Quarter 1 – Module 2
Methods of Philosophizing
 COPYRIGHT 2020

Section 9 of the Presidential Decree No. 49 provides:

“No copy shall subsist in any work of the Government of the Philippines.
However, prior approval of the government agency or office wherein the work is created shall
be necessary for exploitation of such work for profit.”

The original version of this material has been developed in the Schools Division of Surigao
del Norte through the Learning Resource Management and Development Section of the Curriculum
Implementation Division. This material can be reproduced for educational purposes; modified for the
purpose of translation into another language; and creating of an edited version and enhancement of
work are permitted, provided all original work of the author and illustrator must be acknowledged and
the copyright must be attributed. No work may be derived from any part of this material for commercial
purposes and profit.
This material has been approved and published for online distribution through the Learning
Resource Management and Development System (LRMDS) Portal
(http://lrmds.deped.gov.ph).

Development Team of the Module

Writers: Runilo G. Cababat, Cindy O. Subang, Reyjohn Cagampang

Editor: Krystel Grace L. Calderon
Reviewer: Iris Jane M. Canoy
Illustrator: Stephen B. Gorgonio
Layout Artists: Ivan Paul V. Damalerio, Alberto S. Elcullada, Jr.
Management Team: Ma. Teresa M. Real
Laila F. Danaque
Dominico P. Larong, Jr.
Gemma C. Pullos
Manuel L. Limjoco, Jr.

Printed in the Philippines by

Department of Education – Schools Division of Surigao del Norte

Office Address: Peñaranda St., Surigao City

Tel. No.: (086) 826-8216
E-mail Address: surigao.delnorte@deped.gov.ph
 Senior High School

Introduction
to the Philosophy
of the Human Person
Quarter 1 – Module 2
Methods of Philosophizing

ii
Introductory Message
For the facilitator:
Welcome to the Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person Self-
Learning Module on Methods of Philosophizing.
This module was collaboratively designed, developed and reviewed by educators both
from public and private institutions to assist you, the teacher or facilitator in helping the
learners meet the standards set by the K to 12 Curriculum while overcoming their
personal, social, and economic constraints in schooling.
This learning resource hopes to engage the learners into guided and independent
learning activities at their own pace and time. Furthermore, this also aims to help
learners acquire the needed 21st century skills while taking into consideration their
needs and circumstances.

In addition to the material in the main text, you will also see this box in the body of the
module:

Notes to the Teacher

This contains helpful tips or strategies that will help

you in guiding the learners.

As a facilitator, you are expected to orient the learners on how to use this module. You
also need to keep track of the learners' progress while allowing them to manage their
own learning. Furthermore, you are expected to encourage and assist the learners as
they do the tasks included in the module.
For the learner:

Welcome to the Introduction to the Philosophy of the Human Person Self-

Learning Module on Methods of Philosophizing.
This module was designed to provide you with fun and meaningful opportunities for
guided and independent learning at your own pace and time. You will be enabled to
process the contents of the learning resource while being an active learner.

iii
This module has the following parts:

Activity : This will bring understanding to what you already know

and experience to what you should learn further.

Analysis : In this phase, you will process and classify what is valid
and not for a more in-depth understanding.

Abstraction : This part leads you in reinforcing what you know and
should know more. Exercises are presented for
independent practice to solidify your understanding and
skills of the topic.

Application : This stage brings you to a more practical way that you are
going to use what you have learned and think new ways
on how it can be improved further.

iv
 CONTENTS OF THE MODULE
Page
CONTENT STANDARD 1
PERFORMANCE STANDARD 1
LEARNING COMPETENCIES 1
LEARNING OBJECTIVES 1

DAILY LEARNING TASK:

Day Learning Task

1 Introduction 1-6
Pre-Test
Presentation of the New Module
Activity
Analysis
2-3 Abstraction 6-15
Exercise
4 Application 15-16
5 Post-Test 16-19
References 20

1
 LESSON 2
Methods of Philosophizing
Content Standard
The learner demonstrates various ways of doing philosophy

Performance Standard
The learners evaluate opinions

Learning Competencies
2.1 Distinguish opinion from truth.(PPT11/12-lc-2.1)
2.2 Realize that the method of philosophy leads to wisdom and truth.
(PPT11/12-ld-2.2)
2.3 Evaluate truth from opinions in different situations using the method of
philosophizing. (PPT11/12-ld-2.3)

Learning Objectives
Be able to distinguish opinion from truth
Be able to realize that the methods of philosophy lead to wisdom and truth
Be able to evaluate opinions

INTRODUCTION

Welcome to your most awaited part of the subject. In this subject we will know
your capability of reasoning in a philosophical way.

We will introduce methods or ways of watching the reality which are being
considered as mere “opinions”. Philosophizing is to think or express oneself in a
philosophical manner. It considers or discusses a matter from a philosophical
standpoint. In phenomenology, truth relies on the person’s consciousness; while in
existentialism, truth relies in exercising choices and private freedom; in
postmodernism, it's accepted that the actual fact isn't absolute (i.e.,cultural); and in
logic, truth relies on reasoning and demanding thinking.

The history of philosophy is marked by the struggle for the search of the proper
method. There are as many methods as there are philosophers who want to provide
an exhaustive account of the matter they hold in question, although only few among
them believe each other’s presuppositions. From the quality period all the way right
down to this, philosophers have engaged into an open-ended-debate arguing about
the prospect of a unified philosophical method.

1
PRE-TEST

As part of your initial activity, you will be challenged to test your knowledge
on the topic. To assess what you already know about the topic.
Have fun and good luck.

Directions: Read and understand each statement and write the letter of the
correct answer on your answer sheet. (½ lengthwise)

1. What is a defect in an argument other than its having false premises?

A. equivocation
B. Fallacies
C. appeal to pity
D. Appeal to ignorance

2. What is a specific kind of appeal to emotion in which someone tries to win support
for an argument or idea by exploiting his or her opponent’s feelings of guilt?
A. Composition
B. Equivocation
C. Appeal to pity
D. Appeal to ignorance

3. What states that whatever has not been proved false must be true, and vice versa?
A. Composition
B. Equivocation
C. Appeal to pity
D. Appeal to ignorance

4. What fallacy infers that something is true of the whole from the fact that is true of
some part of the whole?
A. Composition
B. Equivocation
C. Appeal to pity
D. Appeal to ignorance

5. What fallacy is a logical chain of reasoning of a term or a word several times, but
giving the particular word a different meaning each time?
A. Composition
B. Equivocation
C. Appeal to pity
D. Appeal to ignorance

2
6. What kind of fallacy that reason’s logically that something true of a thing must also
be true of all or some of its parts?
A. Division
B. Against to force
C. Against the person
D. Appeal to the people

7. In what way is critical thinking a tool for reasoning?

A. Critical thinking deductive arguments.
B. Critical thinking is inductive arguments.
C. Critical thinking reverse of the fallacy is division.
D. Critical thinking is distinguishing facts and opinions or personal feelings

8. It is a specific kind of appeal to emotion in which someone tries to win support for
an argument or idea by exploiting his/her opponents feeling of pity and guilt. What kind
of appeal is this?
A. Appeal to force
B. Appeal to pity
C. Appeal to ignorance
D. Appeal to the People

9. What type of basic reasoning that draws conclusion from usually one broad
judgment or definition and one more specific assertion?
A. Reduction
B. Suspension
C. Deductive reasoning
D. Inductive reasoning

10. What do you call that phenomenologist “brackets” which questions truth or reality
and simply describes the contents of consciousness?
A. Reduction
B. Suspension
C. Deductive reasoning
D. Inductive reasoning

11. What do you call the defect in an argument other than its having a false premise?
A. Fallacy
B. Suspension
C. Deductive reasoning
D. Inductive reasoning

3
12. What ideas justify the Fact or Truth?
A. Ideas based on direct evidence, actual experience, or observation.
B. Ideas referring “the way how one applies his mind to collect information.
C. Phenomenologist “brackets” all questions of truth or reality and simply
describes the contents of consciousness suspension
D. Basic reasoning that draws conclusion from usually one broad judgment or
definition and one more specific assertion

13. What do you think is the meaning of Intelligence in philosophy?

A. It is based on direct evidence, actual experience, or observation.
B. It’s referring “the way how one applies his mind to collect information.
C. It is phenomenologist “brackets” all questions of truth or reality and simply
describes the contents of consciousness Suspension
D. It is basic reasoning that draws conclusion from usually one broad judgment
or definition and one more specific assertion

14. Why do you think that Truth is perceived through 5 senses, namely, seeing,
hearing, tasting, smelling & touching & using 6th sense intelligence?
A. Perceived as a statement of belief or feeling.
B. Perceived his truth suggests to understand, analyze & interpret, to acquire
knowledge.
C. Perceived as truth is only the "reality" of circumstances, applicable only for
that moment.
D. His discretion in applying the knowledge for meaningful expression &
maximum positive advantage at the right place, time & circumstances to the
right people or thing.

15. What details would you use to support the view of Knowledge?
A. It is based on direct evidence, actual experience, or observation
B. It is perceive through 5 senses, namely, seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling &
touching & using 6th sense intelligence
C. It is a collection of information, which can contain good & bad, sensitive &
sensible, emotional, purposeful and wasteful information.
D. It is a type of basic reasoning that draws conclusion from usually one broad
judgment or definition and one more specific assertion

4
REVIEW OF THE PREVIOUS LESSON

In the previous module, the meaning and process of doing philosophy,

emphasizing the importance of holistic approaches, and learning how to construct
philosophical essays were introduced. We also learned the branches of philosophy
and the great philosophers. The importance of Philosophy was also discussed.

Do you remember the branches of philosophy? If yes, what are the branches in
philosophy?

PRESENTATION OF THE NEW MODULE

This chapter shall demonstrate the assorted ways of doing philosophy. In

seeking wisdom, the learner must evaluate arguments and ways of expressing one's
beliefs, emotion, and opinions.
You will also know the difference between truth, opinion, knowledge, wisdom
and intelligence. In this chapter we expect to grasp how clever we are in terms of
philosophical way of reasoning. We also discover that we are a philosopher in our own
ways.

ACTIVITY 1
What can you say about the picture below? Write your reflection in your notebook.

5
ACTIVITY 2

Conduct an interview and ask this question:

How do you define freedom?

You can choose to interview your fellow member of your family, your parents and
siblings older than you. Document the interview by taking pictures or video of the entire
proceeding. Cite Philosophical insights regarding the interview.

ANALYSIS

ACTIVITY

In a one whole sheet of paper, choose and explain your answer.

1. Philippine National Viand: Adobo vs. Sinigang

2. Presidential Office: Davao or Malacañang?

ABSTRACTION

2.1 Distinguish opinion from truth.

“Fact: statement of actuality or occurrence. A fact is predicated on evidence, actual

experience, or observation.

“Opinion: statement of belief or feeling. It shows one’s feelings on a couple of

subjects. Solid opinions, while supported facts, are someone’s views on an issue and
not facts themselves.”

An opinion is what you think to be the case. You will not be able to prove it, and
in most instances you won’t be called on to indicate proof, that's how we converse with
each other most of the time. Mostly these are opinions not supported facts, though
they'll be.

Truth could be a condition of speech or the word, if and provided that the
proposition isn't only necessary but also sufficient to what it proposes is it true. If what
it asserts is of course the case, then it is true. Mathematical logic attempts to formulate
true statements.

For example “It is raining outside. “

If it is after all raining outside (now) then the statement is correct, and hence true.

6
Unlike an announcement like” the cat sat on the mat” which is understandable but not
a real statement or proposition, unless there actually could be a cat sitting on the mat
now.

A true statement could be time bound like “the cat was sitting on the mat” here
you have got to believe that the human activity was genuine as you have got no way
of confirming whether the statement was a real proposition or an opinion, you just must
take someone’s word for it. Most of what we learn is of this latter form, we take it
because the truth assumes the author is genuine and not trying to deceive us, but
unless we research and be told for ourselves we are always capable of being misled
by an opinion and not the facts.

My understanding is there is no “truth” out there within the flora and fauna. We
either cater to opinions, which most people do on a daily basis to day basis, or we hunt
down truth, like it's in language, because truth intrinsically doesn't exist anywhere else.
(Geoff Lawson, B.A)

Truth- What you perceive through 5 senses, namely, seeing, hearing, tasting,
smelling & touching & using 6th sense intelligence, is simply the fraction of the hidden
truth. The reality of this creation cannot be understood by philosophy or Science. If
there is a God or not it cannot be deciphered by senses. Why there are billions of
species existing, what's the Universe made from & how all creations are destined to
follow Nature’s dictate, what happened before your birth or what happens after death
are shrouded in mysteries & nothing during this world can cause you to understand
the reality of these. What you perceive as truth is barely the "Reality" of circumstances,
applicable just for that moment. If there's no change in such a reality, it continues as
"Realistic Truth" for the complete period of its continuation.

When you say "Scientific Truth", it is the achievement in science as long as it

isn't contradicted or termed obsolete with the substitution of latest discovery.

Intelligence- It is the way how one applies his mind to gather information. One
is also exposed to a situation. But he might not know the way the data is helpful. It is
there, his intelligence suggests to know, analyse and interpret, to accumulate
knowledge.

Knowledge- All that you just accumulate & store through "Intelligence" is that
the knowledge you've got acquired. This can be just a group of data, which may
contain good and bad, sensitive and sensible, emotional, purposeful and wasteful
information. Merely having knowledge serves no purpose, unless it is filtered and
recognized pretty much as good and bad and their utility. One knows what a knife can
do. Its purpose is simply to chop. But how you employ it requires your intelligence. The
knife knows neither good nor bad. It is only a gadget and depending upon the aim, it

7
is often used anywhere, supporting its sharpness. You have got to use your wisdom;
otherwise your intelligence will be misused for doing harm.

Wisdom- If someone uses his discretion in applying the knowledge for

meaningful expression and maximum positive advantage at right place, time and
circumstances to right people or thing, it shows his wisdom

EXERCISE 1

Choose a word from the box below.

1. Write down other related words or ideas that you simply can think about in respect
to the word that you simply chose.
2. Write your answer in an exceedingly one whole sheet of paper.

2.2 Realize that the method of philosophy leads to wisdom and truth.

Well-structured and logical thinking when exhaustive - has always been the
most effective because of looking out for the truth in relevance to the person and what
surrounds us. Therefore, philosophy is the mother of science - and science as we all
are aware of it today came in spite of everything from philosophy and also the
epistemology within it, and also the metaphysics. Does this result in wisdom and truth?
NO - truth is that the Lord in relevancy all existences within the Universe.

These are facts in life that you will just simply find if and after you truly search -
with an open mind - for the reality. Is that structured and logic thinking full - wisdom?
Is that the thought based on “wisdom” from the Hindus or Buddhists philosophies –
wisdom or perhaps truth? Now, to be capable of judgments within this field you'd wish
to grasp these matters first. You would like to know who God is in spite of everything
and who God isn't. What then comes from God - and what does in any case do NOT
come from God. Wisdom is taken into consideration (on the thought of the thoughts of
Aristotle) to be a mixture of theoretical knowledge (Sophia) and thus the sensible
(phronesis) …(Kant made the identical distinction and deepened the thoughts in

8
regard)- where the soul has integrated these parts into one solid ground or foundation
within him/her.

So wisdom would then stand for: a capacity to possess perspicacity and

conduct and at the same time a deep understanding of theoretical knowledge of the
only kind. But… real deep wisdom are some things quite different after all - whether or
not and when a non-public has acquired the latter within the above mentioned manner-
and (also) it's the “fear of God”. NOW, fear doesn't really mean the lexical definition of
the word - but to be able and capable to grasp the role we - being humans- have, and
also the Role of God altogether that exists. Thereby act and think, accordingly.
Altogether matters. (Anna Emdenborg, B. A)

What is Wisdom? Normally, the dictionary describes wisdom by the quality of

getting experience, knowledge, and customary sense. Pertinent synonyms include:
sagacity, sense, logic, astuteness, judiciousness, and prudence. The opposite of
wisdom isn't stupidity, but foolishness. Many very bright people aren't very wise, and
plenty of people of average intelligence carry a deep wisdom. What are you wise about
in your own life? Wisdom in Buddhism In Buddhism, wisdom is one altogether the
three major pillars of practice, the opposite two being virtue (sila) and meditative depth
(samadhi).

Of these, wisdom is seen as most central, since this will be often what dispels
ignorance. For its ignorance, not “sin” during a spiritual sense, which is regarded in
Buddhism because the root of all that's harmful or evil. (Other terms used for this
ignorance are delusion, confusion, and self-deception.) For example, while
concentration in meditation is seen as a necessary skill, that alone won't carry a private
to the farthest shore. One must even have insight – vipassana – and that’s what's
ultimately transformative. (Though, to be sure, deep concentration is additionally a
wonderful facilitator of liberating insight.) Wisdom is extremely important because it
peers through the veils of ignorance, confusion, and illusion into the middle of those
three fundamental characteristics of existence: Everything changes. Therefore,
nothing is permanent.

Not an inspiration, not a life, not the archipelago, not the earth itself. Everything
is connected to and interdependent with everything else. Therefore, nothing has an
inherent, absolute self-identity. Not an electron, not a tendril of froth on the ocean, not
a redwood tree, not your body or mind or “I.” Everybody suffers. In Buddhism, the
measure of true wisdom is its practical effectiveness, not its abstract or theoretical
correctness. Since the overriding aim of Buddhism is that the highest of suffering, the
essence of wisdom is knowing what finally ends up in happiness for oneself et al., and
what doesn't . . . knowing what’s wholesome and what isn’t . . . knowing which tunnels
have the cheese and which don't. Wisdom sees that clinging winds up in suffering
anytime.

9
 To paraphrase the Buddha: “I offer one thing: wisdom that knows how to suffer
no more.” To say this barely differently, wisdom means a deep understanding of the
Four Noble Truths. Because it says within the Samyutta Nikaya (8): Where can the
varsity of wisdom be seen (at its best)? Within the Four Noble Truths. The utter
penetration into those Truths is that the sphere of Nibbana; enlightenment is that the
perfection of wisdom. That's why wisdom is taken into consideration perhaps the
foremost fundamental of the ten “paramis” or perfections. (Rick Hanson, 2007)

2.3 Evaluate truth from opinions in different situations using the method of
philosophizing

A. Phenomenology: On Self-Consciousness
For phenomenologists, the immediate and first-personal givenness of
experience is accounted for in terms of a pre-reflective self-consciousness. Within the
simplest sense of the term, self-consciousness is not something that comes about the
instant one attentively inspects or reflectively introspects one’s experiences, or
recognizes one’s specular image within the mirror, or refers to oneself with the
utilization of the first-person pronoun, or constructs a self-narrative. Rather, these
different varieties of self-consciousness are to be distinguished from the pre-reflective
self-consciousness which is present whenever I’m living through or undergoing an
experience, e.g., whenever I’m consciously perceiving the planet, remembering a past
event, imagining a future event, thinking an concurrent thought, or feeling sad or
happy, thirsty or in pain, and then forth.
1. Pre-reflective self-consciousness
2. Philosophical issues and objections
3. Temporality and therefore the limits of reflective self-consciousness
4. Bodily self-awareness
5. Social varieties of self-consciousness

1. Pre-reflective self-consciousness
One can get a sway on the notion of pre-reflective self-consciousness by
contrasting it with reflective self-consciousness. If you inquire from me to administer
you an outline of the pain I feel in my right foot, or of what I used to be just puzzling
over, I'd reflect thereon and thereby take up a specific perspective that was one order
far away from the pain or the thought. Thus, reflective self-consciousness is a
minimum of second-order cognition. It is going to be the idea for a report on one’s
experience, although not all reports involve a major amount of reflection. In contrast,
pre-reflective self-consciousness is pre-reflective within the sense that;
(1) It is an awareness we've before we do any reflecting on our experience;
(2) It is an implicit and first-order awareness instead of an exact or higher-order type
of self-consciousness. Indeed, a certain reflective self-consciousness is feasible only
because there's a pre-reflective self-awareness that's an on-going and more primary
reasonably self-consciousness. In short, unless knowledge is pre-reflective and self-
conscious there will be nothing if it wishes to undergo, and it therefore cannot be a

10
phenomenally conscious process (Zahavi 1999, 2005, 2014). An implication of this
{can be} obviously that the self-consciousness in question is so fundamental and basic
that it can be ascribed to all or any creatures that are phenomenally conscious,
including various non-human animals.
2. Philosophical issues and objections
The concept of pre-reflective self-awareness is expounded to a spread of
philosophical issues, including epistemic asymmetry, immunity to error through
misidentification and self-reference. We'll examine these issues each successively. It
seems clear that the objects of my seeing are intersubjectively accessible within the
sense that they'll in theory be the objects of another’s perception. A subject’s internal
representation itself, however, is given in a very unique way thanks to the topic itself.
Although two people, A and B, can perceive a numerically identical object, they each
have their own distinct perception of it; even as they cannot share each other’s pain,
they cannot literally share these perceptual experiences.
Their experiences are epistemically asymmetrical during this regard. B might
realize that A is in pain; he might be compassionate to A, he might even have the
identical quiet pain (same qualitative aspects, same intensity, same proprioceptive
location), but he cannot literally feel A’s pain the identical way A does. The subject’s
epistemic access to her own experience, whether it's a pain or a representation, is
primarily a matter of pre-reflective self-awareness. If secondarily, in an act of
introspective reflection I begin to look at my perception, I will be able to recognize it as
my internal representation only because I've been pre-reflectively attentive to it, as I've
been living through it.
Thus, phenomenology maintains the access that reflective self-
consciousness needs to first-order phenomenal experience is routed through pre-
reflective consciousness, for if we weren't pre-reflectively alert to our experience, our
reflection on that would never be motivated. After I reflect, I reflect on something with
which I am already experientially familiar. 3. Temporality and therefore the limits of
reflective self-consciousness. Although, as pre-reflective self-aware of my experience
I am not unconscious of it, I do not attend to it; rather I tend to overlook it in favor of
the item that I am perceiving, the thing I am remembering, etc. In my daily life, I am
absorbed by and preoccupied with projects and objects within the world, and per se I
do not attend to my experiential life.
Therefore, this pervasive pre-reflective self-consciousness is not to be
understood as complete self-comprehension. One can accept the notion of a
pervasive self-consciousness and still accept the existence of the unconscious within
the sense of subjective components which remain ambiguous, obscure, and proof
against comprehension. Thus, one should distinguish between the claim that
consciousness is characterized by an instantaneous first-person character and
therefore the claim that consciousness is characterized by total self-transparency. One
can easily accept the primary and reject the latter (Ricoeur 1950, 354–355).

11
4. Bodily self-awareness
Much of what we have said about self-consciousness should seem overly
mentalistic. It is important to notice that for phenomenologists like Husserl and
Merleau-Ponty, pre-reflective self-awareness is both embodied and embedded within
the world. The first-person point of view on the planet is rarely a view from nowhere;
it's always defined by the case of the perceiver’s body, which concerns not simply
location and posture, but action in pragmatic contexts and interaction with people. Pre-
reflective self-awareness includes aspects that are both bodily and intersubjective.
The claim is not simply that the perceiver/actor is objectively embodied, but that
the body is in some fashion experientially present within the perception or action.
Phenomenologists distinguish the pre-reflective body-awareness that accompanies
and shapes every spatial experience, from a reflective consciousness of the body. i
would need to look or feel around so as to seek out where the tool is; but, under normal
circumstances, I never should try this in relevance to my body. I’m tacitly aware, not
only of where my hands and feet are, but also of what I can do with them. This tacit
awareness of my body always registers as an “I can” (or “I can’t,” because the case
may be).
Primarily, my body is experienced, not as an object, but as a field of activity and
affectivity, as a potentiality of mobility and volition, as an “I do” and “I can.”

5. Intersubjective and social varieties of self-consciousness

A focus on embodied self-experience inevitably ends up in a decisive widening
of the discussion. The externality of embodiment puts me, and my actions, within the
public sphere. Self-consciousness, which involves a capability to form reflective
judgments about our own beliefs and desires, is usually shaped by others and what
we've learned from others. This intersubjective or social influence may also affect pre-
reflective self-awareness, including my sense of embodied agency.
I can become alert to myself through the eyes of people, and this may happen
in an exceedingly number of various ways. Thus, embodiment brings intersubjectivity
and sociality into the image, and draws attention to the question of how certain sorts
of self-consciousness are intersubjectively mediated, and should rely on one’s social
relations to others. My awareness of myself joined others, an awareness that I'll frame
from the attitude of others, attempting to determine myself as they see me, involves a
change within the attitude of self-consciousness. Within this attitude, judgments that I
make about myself are constrained by social expectations and cultural values. This
sort of social self-consciousness is usually contextualized, as I try and understand how
I appear to others, both within the way I look, and within the meaning of my actions. I
find myself particularly contexts, with specific capabilities and dispositions, habits and
convictions, and that i express myself in an exceedingly way that's reflected off of
others, in relevant (socially defined) roles through my language and my actions
B. Existentialism: Human Freedom Existentialism could be a philosophy that
emphasizes individual existence, freedom and selection. It's the view that humans
define their own meaning in life, and check out to form rational decisions despite
existing in an irrational universe. It focuses on the question of human existence, and

12
therefore the feeling that there's no purpose or explanation at the core of existence. It
holds that, as there's no God or the other transcendent force, the sole thanks to
counter this nothingness (and hence to search out meaning in life) is by embracing
existence.
C. Logic and demanding Thinking: Tools in Reasoning Logic is centred within
the analysis and construction of arguments. Within the first chapter, logic is discussed
in concert of its main branches. Logic and demanding thinking function paths to
freedom from half- truths and deceptions. Critical thinking could be distinguishing facts
and opinions or a private feeling. In making rational choices, first, we suspend beliefs
and judgment until all facts are gathered and regarded. Though facts are important,
critical thinking also takes into consideration cultural systems, values and beliefs.
Critical thinking helps us uncover bias and prejudice and receptive new ideas
not necessarily in agreement with previous thoughts. In general, there are two basic
varieties of reasoning: deductive and inductive. Induction relies on observations so as
to create generalizations. This reasoning is commonly applied in prediction,
forecasting or behaviour. Reasoning draws conclusion from usually one broad
judgment or definition and another specific assertion, often an inference. See instance:
All philosophers are wise. (Major premise)
Confucius may be a philosopher. (Minor premise)
Therefore, Confucius is wise (Conclusion)

Validity and Soundness of an Argument supported the previous example (or

syllogism). If the 2 premises are constructed logically, then the conclusion must follow
logically, the deductive argument is valid. This does not necessarily mean that the
conclusion is true or false. Validity comes from a logical conclusion is true or false.
Validity comes from a logical conclusion supported logically constructed premises
(Reed 2010)

D. What are Fallacies?

A fallacy may be a general form of appeal (or category of argument) that

resembles good reasoning, but that we should always not find to be persuasive. In
reasoning to argue a claim, a fallacy is reasoning that's evaluated as logically incorrect
which undermines the logical validity of the argument and permits its recognition as
unsound. Irrespective of their soundness, all registers and manners of speech can
demonstrate fallacies. On the opposite hand, a fallacy could be a defect in an
argument aside from its having false premises. To detect fallacies, it's required to look
at the arguments content. Here are a number of the usually committed errors in
reasoning and thus, arising with false conclusions and worse, distorting the reality.

13
a. Appeal to pity (Argumentum ad misericordiam)

- A specific reasonable appeal to emotion during which someone tries to win

support for an argument or idea by exploiting his or her opponent’s feeling of
pity or guilt.

b. Appeal to ignorance (Argumentum ad ignorantiam)

- Whatever has not been proved false must be true, and contrariwise.

c. Equivocation
This is a logical chain of reasoning of a term or of a word several times, but giving the
actual word a special meaning whenever. Example: groups of people have hands; the
clock has hands. He's drinking from the pitcher of water: he's a baseball pitcher.

d. Composition
This infers that something is true of the overall from the actual undeniable fact that it's
true of some a part of the whole. The reverse of this fallacy is division.

e. Division
- One reason logically is that something true of a thing must even be true of all or style
of its parts.

f. Against the Person (Argumentum ad hominem)

- This fallacy attempts to link the validity of a premise to a characteristic or belief of the
person advocating the premise. However, in some instances, questions of personal
conduct, character, motives, etc., are legitimate if relevant to the matter.

g. Appeal to force (Argumentum ad baculum)

- An argument where force, coercion, or the threat of force, is given as justification for
a conclusion.

h. Appeal to the people (Argumentum ad populum)

- An argument that appeals or exploits people’s vanities, desire for esteem, and
anchoring on popularity.

i. False cause (post hoc)

- Since that event followed this one, that event must be caused by this one. This fallacy
is additionally cited as coincidental correlation, or correlation, not causation.

j. Hasty generalization
- One commits errors if one reaches an inductive generalization supporting insufficient
evidence. This commonly supported broad conclusion upon the statistics of a survey
of a little group that fails to sufficiently represent the entire population.

14
k. Begging the question (principi principia)
- This is a sort of fallacy during which the proposition to be proven is assumed implicitly
or explicitly within the premise.
“Facts are statements which will be shown to be true or are often proved, or something
that basically happened. You may be able to search facts in an encyclopedia or other
reference, or see them for yourself. as an example, it's a proven fact that broccoli is
sweet for you (you can look this up in books about healthy diets).

“Opinions express how a private feels about something – opinions don't have to be
based upon logical reasoning. as an example, it's an opinion that broccoli tastes good
(or bad).”

Both of those connect fact with probability. But in common parlance, “provability”
seems audience-relative as well: While one person might find Anselm’s ontological
argument to be a sufficient proof for God’s existence (thus rendering “God exists” a
fact for that person); others won't.

Circumstances surrounding an occurrence, statement, or idea, and in terms of which

it should be fully understood. Facts and opinions must be placed in context to draw
conclusions from.

For example, a young boy who tells his mother “I ate a truckload of sweets at the party
last night” should be placed within the context of his age, and audience.
We can confidently infer he never actually ate a true truckload of sweets, but we'll
reasonably appreciate he ate plenty of them and wanted to worry that time.
His mother might ask a clarifying question to point that opinion into a tough fact.

APPLICATION

Activity I: Write your explanation in a whole sheet of paper.

There was a robbery in which a lot of goods were stolen. The robber(s)
left the truck. It is known that: (1) nobody else could have been involved
other than Rico, Ben and Glen. (2) Glen never commits a crime without
Rico’s participation.(3) Ben does not know how to drive. So, is Rico
innocent or guilty?

Criteria:
Soundness 10 pts
Validity 5 pts
Strength 10 pts
Total 25 pts

15
Activity II: Check ME

Below are signal words and phrases being used in the sentence fragments that often
precede a statement of fact or opinion: Mark a check in your choice.

Words and phrases Fact Opinions

The annual report confirms…

He claimed that…

It is the officer’s view that…

Scientists have recently discovered…

The investigation demonstrated…

POST-TEST

Directions: Read and understand each statement and write the letter of the
correct answer on your answer sheet. (½ lengthwise)

1. What type of basic reasoning is based on the observations in order to make

generalization?
A. Reduction
B. Suspension
C. Deductive reasoning
D. Inductive reasoning

2. What type of basic reasoning that draws conclusion from usually one broad
judgment or definition and one more specific assertion?
A. Reduction
B. Suspension
C. Deductive reasoning
D. Inductive reasoning

16
3. What do you call that phenomenologist “brackets” which questions truth or reality
and simply describes the contents of consciousness?
A. Reduction
B. Suspension
C. Deductive reasoning
D. Inductive reasoning

4. What is a defect in an argument other than its having false premises?

A. Fallacy
B. Suspension
C. Deductive reasoning
D. Inductive reasoning

5. What type of fallacy in which the proposition to be proven is assumed implicitly in

the premise?
A. False Cause
B. Hasty Generalization
C. Begging the question
D. Appeal to the People

6. What fallacy is also referred to as coincidental correlation, or correlation not

causation?
A. False Cause
B. Hasty Generalization
C. Begging the question
D. Appeal to the People

7. What fallacy is commonly based on a broad conclusion upon the statistics of a

survey of a small group that fails to sufficiently represent the whole population?
A. False Cause
B. Hasty Generalization
C. Begging the question
D. Appeal to the People

8. What fallacy is an argument that appeals or exploits people's vanities, desire for
esteem and anchoring on popularity?
A. False Cause
B. Hasty Generalization
C. Begging the question
D. Appeal to the People

17
9. What kind of argument where force, coercion or the threat of force is given as a
justification for a conclusion?
A. Composition
B. Force coercion
C. Appeal to force
D. Appeal to the People

10. What kind of fallacy that attempts to link the validity of a premise to characteristics
or beliefs of the person advocating the premise?
A. Composition
B. Force coercion
C. Against the person
D. Appeal to the People

11. What fallacy states that whatever has been proved false must be true, and vice
versa?
A. Appeal to force
B. Appeal to ignorance
C. Appeal to pity
D. Appeal to the People

12. What details would you use to support the view of Knowledge?
A. It is based on direct evidence, actual experience, or observation
B. It is perceive through 5 senses, namely, seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling &
touching & using 6th sense intelligence
C. It is a collection of information, which can contain good & bad, sensitive &
sensible, emotional, purposeful and wasteful information.
D. It is a type of basic reasoning that draws conclusion from usually one broad
judgment or definition and one more specific assertion.

13. What do you think is the meaning of Intelligence in philosophy?

A. It is based on direct evidence, actual experience, or observation.
B. It’s referring “the way how one applies his mind to collect information.
C. It is phenomenologist “brackets” all questions of truth or reality and simply
describes the contents of consciousness Suspension.
D. It is basic reasoning that draws conclusion from usually one broad judgment
or definition and one more specific assertion.

18
14. What ideas justify the Fact or Truth?
A. Ideas based on direct evidence, actual experience, or observation.
B. Ideas referring “the way how one applies his mind to collect information.
C. Phenomenologist “brackets” all questions of truth or reality and simply
describes the contents of consciousness Suspension
D. basic reasoning that draws conclusion from usually one broad judgment or
definition and one more specific assertion

15. Why do you think that Truth is perceived through 5 senses, namely, seeing,
hearing, tasting, smelling & touching & using 6th sense intelligence?
A. Perceived as a statement of belief or feeling.
B. Perceived his truth suggests to understand, analyze & interpret, to acquire
knowledge.
C. Perceived as truth is only the "Reality" of circumstances, applicable only for
that moment.
D. His discretion in applying the knowledge for meaningful expression &
maximum positive advantage at the right place, time & circumstances to the
right people or thing.

19
REFERRENCES

• Anna Emdenborg, B. A Philosophy, Lund University

• B.V. Varadarajan, former Retired after Serving in Various Organizations (1964-

1998

• Christine Carmela R. Ramos, PhD. “Introduction to the Philosophy of the

Human Person” First edition.

• Geoff Lawson, B.A from Macquarie University (1980)

• Rick Hanson, 2007

• https://www2.palomar.edu/users/bthompson/What%20is%20a%20Fallacy.htm
l

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies#Propositional_fallacies

• Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

• https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/self-consciousness-phenomenological/

• B.V. Varadarajan, former Retired after Serving in Various Organizations (1964-

1998

• https://www.philosophersmag.com/essays/26-the-fact-opinion-distinction

• https://www.slideshare.net/ArnelLPU/lecture-23637231?from_action=save

20
Para sa mga katanungan o puna, sumulat o tumawag sa:

Department of Education – Schools Division of Surigao del Norte

Peñaranda St., Surigao City
Surigao del Norte, Philippines 8400
Tel. No: (086) 826-8216
Email Address: surigao.delnorte@deped.gov.ph

21