05.10.

2023 reason is capacity to think

Knowledge is processed. Wisdom is having an insight of knowledge.

What is philosophy? What is meaning of life?  religion, philosophy, mythology |art, literature,| psychology, physics,
biology (science)

 Mythology  account of/ stories of ancestors’s wisdom

 religion divine being, revelation, faith
 science  observation and recording data of natural phenomena but not the meaning of life as cannot be
observed.
 Art does not directly aims to answer the question, interpretation, subjective expression

Difference of philosophy from other disciplines in anwering the question is reason.

Do stars care for us ?  how to answer a child asking this in a philosophical manner, define, classify a star via your
observations.Do the same for “care”. İntentionality, alive, perception, consciousness, free will

 P1 fire and stars are similar.  P2 fire is not a living being with consciousness.  given the similarity, C: so stars
cannot be living beings with cons.  C1 stars cannot care for us . (philosophical methodology)

Main branches of philosophy

 metaphysics  meta(after/beyond), physcis (nature), studies being and existence| god soul time number -> no
sense data on these sort of term
 Epistomology  scientific or demonstrative knowledge, studies knowledge
 Ethics ethos : custom habit, studies how to be a good person, good action, have a good life. (value philosophy)
 Aesthetics  beauty , . (value philosophy)
 Logic  logos, study the conditions

10/10/2023

LOGICAL CONSİSTENCY – important for self integrity / for social reliability / for convincing others by consistency
(logical)

A. It is always morally wrong to kill humans

B. It is morally okey to execute serious criminals
 For a set of claims if it is possible for them to be true at the same time. – logically consistent

LOGICAL POSSIBILITY

A. It ıs impossible that Nero throws a ball so high that it hits the stars. Laws of physics -> causal impossibility
B. It is impossible that Nero is both taller and shorter than Glory. Contradiction – mutully exclusive  logical
impossiblity.

“Definition” Aristotles  should explain necessary and sufficient conditions

Nec. Cond -> needs to be general enough to let us know where to search for the defined thing. A condition without
which it is impossible to be that thing.

Suff. Cond -> a condition with which it is impossible to be something else

12/10/2023 Argument: Claim + reasons
I believe that ghosts exist (cliam/conclusion) because I heard strange noises last night (reason/premise).
P1 I heard strange noises standard form (reconstruction)
C Therefore ghosts exist

P1 anything that exists is a pyhsical entity. C1 Angels exists.

 Missing clarification between two such as “Angels are physical entities”  Missing/ hidden premise.

Evaluation of Arguments (presentations will be about this)

1. Determine type of argument :
o Deductive (tümdengelim) (validity or soundness) (gives us certaintity)
P1. All men are mortal P2. Socrates is a mortal C. Socrates is a mortal.
Validity if all premises true then conclusion must be true.
Soundness valid argument + true premise (validity is a requirement for soundness)

P1. All the students at Koç Uni have rich parents. P2. X is a student at Koç. C. X has rich parents.
Valid argument as if P1 and P2 true then C is true. But unsound as C false premise.

P1. If everything is caused then we are not free. P2. Everything is caused. C we are not free.
Valid but soundness cannot be determined.

o Inductive (tümevarım)(Strenght or cogency) (gives us probability)

P1. I observed that swan 1 is white. P2. ----P1000. C All swans are white. False,
C the next swan I will observe will highly probably be white.
Strength  about structure – quality of evidence, if sample is correct in representing whole.
Cogency  about content - one that is both strong and has true premises

Analogies (type of induction)  A&B are similar. A has the quality F. So B has quality F.

17.10.2023 FALLACIES : A mistake in reasoning.

Ability to identify the problem in argument: check quality of evidence & legitimate strategy.

 “The state should ban alcohol consumption, before you know it people will be alcoholics and drug addicts.”
Given the quality of evidence, it is presented as if free cons. definitely cause addiction.

The slippery slope is a fallacy where some event must … slayttan al

 “X is horrified by the way the state uses capital punishment. Y says that cap. Pun. İs fine since those…Given the
illegitimate strategy, it supports idea of two wrongs make a right.

 “women who go out late are more likely to be sexually assaulted. Therefore, if women do not want to be
assaulted, they should not go out late at night.” This argument only shows correlation, the relation between
cause and effect is not presented correctly. Confusing correlation with causation.

 If such actions were not illegal, then they would not be prohibited by law. Circular reasoning.
  Young man from slums accused for murdering his father. Jury says all from slums are liars and criminals. So young
men is guilty. Ad Hominem : insulting and attacking to the personality/life of the other person in order to
dicredit their argument. There must be an initial argument!!! (If not it is just insulting.)

 Appeal to authority: misuse of authority. When person in question is not a legitimate authority on the subject
but utilized with its expertise in another subject.

 Appeal to belief/majority/popularity: given the number of people who buy this idea is not evidence for truth.

 Appeal to emotion

 Appeal to force: threats if not accepting what is told.

 Fallacy of …

 False dilemma (dichotomy): offering only two options as possible whereas there exist more than 2.

 Red Herring: presenting another topic to divert attention from original issue.

24.10.2023 Plato (427-347BCE) – Euthyphro

İnterlocutor

What is piety?

 E1: Piety is what I am doing, prosecuting the wrongdoer. (an example !)

 S1: Its an example, def should give an essence/ chracteristics of the term in quesiton.
 E2: Pious is What is dear to the gods.
 S2: P1: Pious and impious are opposites.
P2: the gods are in conflict with each other about matters (such as beautiful and ugly, just/unjust [notice
these are subjective issues]).
P3: the same things can be loved by some gods but hated by some others.
C: The same thing is both pious and impious at the same time. (contradiction)
 E3: Pious is what is loved by all the gods.
 S3: Pious is loved by all the gods because it is pious? (circular def.) OR Smt is pious because it is loved by all the
gods? (it is just a quality not the essence!)

26.10.2023

Carrying – being carried – carried thing  these are affected, not by nature it is carried thing

Piety = smt being loved by all the gods = god-loved thing  definitions as equations

 If this is a solid definition we can change order, b=a smt being loved by all the gods then it is pious ???
No because ambrosia is god fruit (Loved by all the gods) but this does not make (imply) it pious, it is just a fruit.

Aporra (without a path) is created by sokrates.

 E4: pious is necessarily a part of justice which concerns the care for the gods.
 In text, care serves two purposes, being beneficial, making them better (but how make smt perfect any better?, so
does not apply for gods). Being beneficial -> doing whatever dear to gods -> come back to earlier steps.

What is moral action  intentions  euthpro cannot have good intention cause he does not know what is right what is
wrong.

Whatever god says is good.

If god says something is good because it is good then there is another source/authority determining good.

31.10.2023 ARISTOTLE

Ch1 how to live well?

Ch2 Fiely of study: politics

Ch3 methodology: the findings would be true for the most part, in outline and rough (but exceptions exists due to
human nature)

Ch5 review  ordinary (wealth-> life of consumption) instrumental goods

militarymen (honour (power-recognition)-> life of action) incomplete/not sustainable

intellectual ( truth /wisdom -> life of contemplation (tefekkür))

Ch7 complete: it is sought for its own sake | self-sufficient: lacks nothing | health, wealth, luck, friends

in order to live well one has to fulfill one’s function. | teleological te

07.11.2023 Aquinas

1st article  P1 law is a dictate of practical reason (this term comes from aristotle) by a ruler.

Accrding to Aristotle, reason has 3 branches – theoretical (deal w necessary things, i.e. math, physics, a necessary thing is
a fixed identity, cannot be changed such as a triangle, so universal conclusion can be drawn upon them.) /practical
( human action, contingent, various ways of being that thing, changing, “for the most part”) /productive (doing/making).

P2 god is the ruler of the universe

P3 god’s practical reason is eternal.

C god’s law is eternal there is an eternal law. deductive, valid, soundness cannot be determined (a faithful one
w say its sound but atheist disagrees.

2nd article

P1 Law (ruler/to be ruled)

P2 everything in the universe is ruled by eternal law in accordance with their nature.

P3 given their rationality, humans participate in EL in an excellent way.

C this is called the natural law.

QS94:
P1 the first objective of understanding is being. (not: understading is primary function of human mind, understanding all
things that exists.)

P2 one cannot deny and confirm the same thing. (not contradiction principle)

P3 1st objective of practiced reason is good.

C seek good and shun evil.

 Interpretation of eternal law as a material being: preserve its own being

 a living being: preserve ur own species
 rational being: seek truth & live peacefully in a societies.

9.11.2023

Aquinas  Natural law: seek good & shun evil.

Given human nature (rational for aquinas), certain rights and properties follow, morality. human nature also contains
egoism/ selfishness . Alturistic (prioritizing other’s well being) creatures given human evolution. Certain philosophers
claim in human nature like animal nature, no morality.

Human reason & specific(material, culture, economics) human conditions  morality. ( Marx & Kant)

Kant, 1724 -1804, (age of enlightenment-earth around sun etc, reason, science instead of church rules)

Natural Law (morality) X Law of Nature (physics) -> notice difference

“Have the courage to use your own reason!”, (in Latin sapere aude!) is the battle cry of the Enlightenment. It was
articulated by Immanuel Kant in his famous article 'What is Enlightenment?.

Human dignity  just because we’re humans, we have a inner value. humans dignified ‘cause of ability to think&act
freely (by following dictates of “pure” practical reason) upon it, make choices. (not like animals having a need and
satisfiying it without reason)

logical possibilities/freedom/reason  moral agents & realm of reason (bounded by logic only) & logical possibility

nature/no freedom/laws of physics  no morality & causal possibilities

KANT  good will: the rational desire to do the right thing just because its the right thing to do.

moral (in conformity with duty) vs a-moral (if an action is outside of good intention)

21.11.2023

Why pure practical reason?

motivation  from duty (moral, comes from pure practical reason, good will tells u to do it ‘cause its right thing to do,
autonomous) vs in conformity w duty (a-moral,interest, desire inclination, no moral motivation, heteronomous)

The Universal Law: p360  moral duty

Act in accordance w a maxim (principal of an action) that through which at same time u will that it becomes a universal
law. 1. what would happen if everyone follows my action/ words? 2. would ı end up with contradiction?

(NOTE: THIS IS A CONCEPTUAL ANALYSIS, Kant desire to make morality a theoritical science, away from subjectivity,
applicable to all)

assignment steps: 1. identitfy maxim 2. define key term (make attention to conditions) 3. universalize it 4. check if
contradiction occurs.
23.11.2023 KANT-363

2nd formula never treat any rational being, including yourself, as a means but always as an end in itself.

28.11.2023 MILL 14th century liberalism utilitarianism

utilitarianism not invented by him but developped

Betham’s versionprinciple of utility: an action is right if it promises the highest amount of happiness/good/pleasure
for the highest amount of people.

1- what about the rest/minorities? 2- how to measure pleasure/pain?

After Midterm

12.12.2023 Kierkegaard 19th century

Is there a teleological suspension of the ethical?  telos: end

Ethics – universal: it applies to all, all the time. Ethics is immanent: it ends in itself.

19.12.2023

survival of the fittest  ability to adapt (sometimes strong adapt well sometimes weak) (darwin)

Nietzsche survival of the strongest --- will to power, not hesitating

beast  no moral concern that restricts its actions, he says we no diff than animal, survival instict, if we live in accrd w it,
we would be complete. civilization is like taming this animal. human’s will is broken (not all humans), like a domesticated
animal, lost this fire in themselves, losing their true nature.

principle of life : will to power who affirm it (masters) | who deny it (slaves)

p387  noble ppl do not look for approval

p388  qualities for suffering ppl: (in text) …., most useful practical principles  slave morality is utility maximizing
principles.

nice attributes, kind etc so to survive, morality of utility, in order to get ppl to help you, support you. you act moral not
for sake of ethics but for support/sympathy/love from others.(because you cannot survive war alone)  main difference
between master and slave. in nature masters are found. in slave world, there is an expectation when smt (like a help)
given smt else expected in return. master always act authentically, chooses actions but slaves act upon expectations,
adapts certain qualities, if I do this they ll do this, there is a calculation behind all.

slaves, conforming to others  dying prematurely

will to power = survival instict

master morality = virtues, he develops these qualifitaction just because he deems it necessary. not for any other end.
21.12.2023 SARTRE

Can there be a objective morality?

You can create a society abiding laws, but how to create objective moral in people? God is another name given to infinite
mind who thinks on these values, a reference point, higher consciousness. If no god then what is the reference, everyone
left to its own.

Why do we care about doing the right thing?  feeling of responsibility choose a maxim for yourself without knowing
whether action is right : anxiety  anguish

anguish (uneasiness felt cause of incertaintity) abondenment and despair

pure practical reason as universal capacity of humans: it has an authority but in fact there is no pure practical reason:
who is the authority? no one. would everybody do this if they were ME? (justify my action to myself), subjective. looking
for approval but ı am on my own reasoning. there is no guarantee that ı am doing the right thing  anguish.

abandonment  some ppl feel like getting advices but sartre says no one can share this burden of responsability.
morality of symphaty vs morality of wider scope but of more debatable validity. ppl completely alone in their decisions.

despair  we have limited control on life, ppl do their best to do the right things but no certainity what the outcome will
be? maybe none of the expected happens. sartre (existentialism): act without hope.

we cannot derive you from your potentialities, you are what you did. sartre: you are responsible from what have you
done with what you have in hand, in the circumstances.

(4 absences)

26.12.2023 RITA MANNING CARE ETHICS – virtue ethics

Natural care  wout thinking, comes from inside/inherently, as we are mammals. Example of saving children  we
spent time raising children, caring for offspring, we can use this natural capacity and disposition to form morality, you can
imagine suffering given your natural bond.

in ideally caring person, it is not realistic as this ideal person has no limit on time, effort, care amount. in reality person
should allocate all of resources strategically otherwise ı will be in need to be care for, then how should ı care and who?

we dont have care sense for people whom there is no potential to have a connection with. so we are not obliged to take
a step to care for them. there is no care for polar bears but you care for your pets. emotional connection needed.

when we ignore others’ suffering due to lack of connection : europe reaction to ukraine vs palestine. so how treat
others?

ethical care  requires thinking and reasoning

Female point of view : in nature females are natural caregivers. basis for ethical theory  our natural dispositions could
be base for morality (standard for duty). ethics and ethical duty can be derived from that.
Part I fallacy 8pts

part 2: 20pts

what is x’s criticism of the classical ethical theories.how would Y respond to this criticisim?

X --> kierkegaard / nietzche / sartre / manning

Y--> kant / mill/ aristotle / aquinas

be creative but use each philosophers basic assumptions, how they view ethics, how ethic works (kierkegaard and kant
similar ethic work view but small diff)

be consistent with basic assumpitons of philosophers than speculate a bit, critical thinking.

part 3: 7pts

opinion question: what is the most important q in ethics? or in this class?

nietzche : criticism: ethic is just a survival strategy for you.,you have all these virtues cause you want recognition, love ,
acceptance out of these actions, instrumental value. his target in slave morality is classical ethic

Mill: ethic should serve for greater goods, if many ppl lives are improved by this, what is the problem?

aristotle: good citizen and good person same as were part of whole: virtues  good citizen in a well functioning society.
 well working machine parts, making it possible for me to achieve my end, realize my potential .

aquinas: for god’s love, intrinsic value, human rationality,

MILL: a better world in terms of minimizng pain.

RATIONALITY ALMOST IN ALL OF THEM