Some Basics/History 02/05/2014
SOME QUESTIONS
do we have a soul?
is there a God?
is there something like selfesteem? Or memory? Or a need for selfactualizing?
infer that there must be something like memory, even though we cannot know for a certain
strong belief in memory is very similar to a strong belief in God
HOW DO PEOPLE “KNOW”
two major approaches as to how one gathers beliefs:
1) rationalism: the principle that reason is the supreme authority in matters of opinion, belief, or
conduct
as used in philosophy, it is the doctrine that reason alone is a source of knowledge and is not
dependent on experience
for some, the belief is that all knowledge is expressible in selfevident propositions or their consequences
know about the world because we reason about it, not based on experience
2) empiricism: a theory of knowledge which states that knowledge comes only or primarily from sensory
experience
is fundamental to modern day scientific methodologies that hypotheses and theories be tested with
observations of the natural world
knowledge about the world through experience
gain experience through our senses
if we only gain experience through our senses, we come into the world knowing very little
how can we trust our senses if they can cause such errors
SCIENCE AS A MEANS OF KNOWING
some approaches:
the traditional model that science grows through induction: observing the world and drawing generalizations
from those observations the role of falsification (Karl Popper): important aspect of true science is that it can be falisified
paradigms and paradigm shifts (Thomas Kuhn)
SCIENCE AS INDUCTION
describes science as the process doing the following:
facts are observed and recorded
the observed and recorded facts are analyzed, compared and categorized
find patterns
from this analysis of the facts, generalizations are inductively drawn as to the relations (empirical
regularities) between them
further research is either inductive or deductive, employing inferences from previously established
generalizations
induction = inference of a generalized conclusion from particular instances
deduction = inference in which the conclusion about particulars necessarily follows from general or
universal premises
OVERALL MODEL
Laws and
theories
Induction Deduction
Facts acquired
through explanationsand
observation
classic view of science
induction = empirical
works under the premise that our observations are valuefree KARL POPPER
observation is always affected by prior theoretical and conceptual commitments:
it is guided by and presupposes theory
observation is theoryladen
theories cannot be established as true in the light of observational evidence
observations do not exist in a vacuum
they are created by our beliefs and prior commitments in the world
what we observe is not neutral
theories are constructed as speculative and tentative conjectures freely created by the human intellect in
an attempt to overcome probems encountered by previous theories to give an adequate account of some
aspects of the world
theories can never be absolute
always speculative
once proposed, speculative theories are to be rigorously and ruthlessly tested by observation and
experiment
theories that conflict with empirical evidence must be eliminated (falsified) and replaced by new theories
OVERALL MODEL
science progresses by trial and error, by conjectures an refutations
only the fittest theories survive and are tentatively and temporarily accepted
theories that explain the data survive
accepted until they are falsified
a theory is the best view of the world at a particular time
THOMAS KUHN
scientists do not in fact falsify theories in the ‘instant’ way specified by Popper while at the level of empirical hypotheses Popper’s idea of falsification may operate, this cannot be
maintained at the level of broader theoretical structures or the evolution of science as a whole
concentrations of specific theories, and not theories as a whole
at any one given time, there is a paradigm that ties together all these little theories
may reject specific theories, but do not falsify the paradigm as a whole
KUHN AND PARADIGMS
inThe Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962) Thomas Kuhn argues that science evolves – not
in a logically linear fashion by through dramatic shifts in how scientists see/understand the world
coined the term ‘paradigm’ and ‘paradigm shift’
paradigm: way of looking at the world at a given time
paradigm shift: ‘scientific revolutions’; change of this world view
PARADIGM
the framework of accepted ideas in which one operates
might include ideas on truth, validity, and methodology
FACETS TO A PARADIGM
the metaphysical paradigm involves those assumptions that affect the way in which man views the
world and his place in it
Darwin: believed man was an animal just like any other
Difficult concept to accept at the time
Galileo: cosmology
the sociological paradigm refers to a concrete scientific achievement that functions as a model or
framework within which scientific research is conducted (can precede metaphysical paradigm)
the artifact paradigm concerns a distinct set of tools, techniques or instrumentation that are considered
relevant to the validation of scientific knowledge
PARADIGM SHIFTS Kuhn argues that scientists will tend to work within the paradigm and thus seek evidence which supports
the paradigm (normal science)
until such time as anomalies are so strong as to precipitate a paradigm shift or revolution
Anomalies: kind of ignored, until they accumulate so much
a new ‘normal science paradigm’ is established and the process begins again
Accept that this is the normal paradigm, that these are the accepted beliefs, and work within these ideas
GENERAL MODEL
normal science (working within a paradigm)
crisis
revolutionary science
switch in understanding
new period of normal science
new paradigm is incommensurable with previous one
a paradigm will never be replaced unless a ‘less problematic or better’ one comes around
within this general process of development of science, Kuhn stresses:
the importance of the scientific community
the role of extrascientific elements
this implies a conception of science as a social activity
BEFORE DESCARTES
ANCIENT GREEK PHILOSOPHERS (c. 400300 BCE)
very Eurocentric view of history
traces back to ancient Greece, Rome
empiricism (Aristotle) vs. Rationalism (Plato): is knowledge derived from experience or in some way
innate? materialism vs. idealism: is thought reducible to some material substance or not?
Is thought reducible to brain activity or is there more to it?
dualism of mind and body: how can the two be reconciled?
What is the difference between our mind and body, or can they be intertwined?
Do the same rules apply for both?
THE MIDDLE AGES
roughly 400 AD to 1500 AD
often broken into the:
Early Middle Ages (about 4501000 AD)
High Middle Ages (about 10001300 AD)
Late Middle Ages (about 13001500 AD)
ostensibly start with the fall of the Roman Empire
accumulated classical knowledge fell into disuse
only kept alive by religious hoarders
view of the world changed
mass immigration of populations into Western Europe
Dark Ages: loss of classical knowledge
WORLD BEFORE DESCARTES
the Roman Empire had preserved knowledge, but it collapsed and was overrun by Barbarians
access to accumulated knowledge was preserved in Muslim libraries but these were inaccessible because
the West was mostly Christian
wars between Muslim and Christian
the Medieval Church discouraged literacy, free thought, and scientific inquiry beyond the revealed wisdom
of clerics & church scholars (St. Augustine) people were for the most part illiterate, except for the clergy
with the Crusades, knowledge was rediscovered
TH TH
SAINT AUGUSTINE (LATE 4 AND EARLY 5 CENTURY)
Arab convert to Christianity
attempted to reconcile the Greek emphasis on reason with the emphasis on religious emotion in the
teaching of Christ and the apostles
trying to reconcile Christian teachings to other aspects of the world
argued that religious faith and philosophical understanding are complementary rather than opposed and
that one must “believe in order to understand and understand in order to believe”
what is the relationship between philosophical understanding and received wisdom from the Church?
They are symbolic
Need to believe in teachings of Christ and the Church in order to understand the world
considered the soul a higher form of existence than the body and taught that
knowledge consists in the contemplation of Platonic ideas as abstract notions
apart from sensory experience and anything physical or material
immaterial soul: independent of the body
SAINT THOMAS AQUINAS (12241274)
provided a new account of the relationship between faith and reason
the truths of faith and the truths of reason cannot conflict but rather apply to different realms
can believe something that does not seem to be reasonable
reason may show that it does not seem likely, but faith shows that it can happen
different laws for faith and reason, must keep them separate
the truths of natural science and philosophy are discovered by reasoning from facts of experience
the tenets of revealed religion, the doctrine of Trinity, the creation of the world, and other articles of
Christian dogma are beyond rational comprehension, although not inconsistent with reason, and must be
accepted on faith
ACCEPTANCE OF GIVEN KNOWLEDGE; important concept of Middle Ages THE RENAISSANCE
roughly from 14 17 century
experienced unevenly in Europe
spread from its birthplace in Florence, first to the rest of Italy, and then to the rest of Europe
Black Death (bubonic plague)
carried by fleas
very quick death
commerce stopped to a large extent
traditional views of the world had disappeared
led to decimation of population of Europe
questions: why is God punishing us?
London was almost spared by Great Fire
Sort of Ice Age: widespread cooling over Europe
invention of the printing press (Germany)
became relatively cheap for people to reproduce documents
spread of knowledge
religious disagreements; protestant reformation
disagreements among the Catholic Church
starting to question the interpretation of the Bible by the Catholic church
moving away from Christian ideals
Protestant vs. Christian wars
Very sensitive in finding heresy
Inquisition: search for religious purity THE ENLIGHTENMENT
the “Age of Reason”
th th
a cultural movement of intellectuals beginning in the late 17 and 18 century Europe
emphasis on reason and individualism rather than tradition
purpose: to reform society using reason, challenge ideas grounded in tradition and faith, and advance
knowledge
promoted scientific though, skepticism, and intellectual interchange
opposed superstition and intolerance, with the Catholic Church often the brunt of their critiques
where does Descartes fit into this?
Example of the High Renaissance
At the transition of the Renaissance (classical knowledge, scientific beliefs)
People coming out the enlightenment
Part of the zeitgeist was the question ideas and previous knowledge
Argument: why do you trust a manmade instrument instead of the instrument that God gave you (your own
eyes)? Rene Descartes 15961650 02/05/2014
THE NOTSO DARK AGES
11 13 centuries in Europe witnessed:
the rise of towns and commerce
the maturation of Romanesque architecture and the invention of the Gothic style
the expression of constitutionalism (England), in political theory and practice
the birth of romantic love
increase of population/food production, and the rise of universities, etc.
EDUCATION
14 universities were established in the 12 and 13 centuries, including Oxford & Cambridge
basic curriculum – traditional seven liberal arts
1. astronomy, 2. geometry, 3. arithmetic, 4. music, 5. grammar, 6. rhetoric, 7. logic
higher disciplines: 1. Theology, 2. Law, 3. Medicine
after completion – license to teach
THE NOTSO LIGHT AGES
civil war and wars between France, Italy, & England disrupted the 14 century
plague (Black Death, 13481350) killed 1/3 of the population of Europe, BUT
the era that preceded Descartes and into which he was born was an age of striking contrasts: of fear and
hope, of poverty and commercial validity, and of crudeness and yet sophistication in many areas
indeed, Europe had already ‘awaken’ in the High Middle Ages
RENAISSANCE SCIENCE
the view of man’s place in the universe changed
Copernicus (1543) demoted humans from a central to a peripheral position – his system was called
antireligious Rene Descartes 15961650 02/05/2014
Galileo (1610) confirmed his view that the Earth goes around the Sun, not vice versa, as did Bruno
Galileo also developed a method of manipulating variables while controlling other factors in experiments
BUT
goaded by Martin Luther’s Protestant Reformation, the Catholic Church was unreceptive to Galileo’s new
theory
the inquisition
religious wars
heretics were burned at the stake (eg., Bruno)
RENE DESCARTES: FAMILY
Rene’s father and brother were lawyers, and Rene received his BA and law license in ‘civil and canon law’
in November, 1616
Rene’s mother died in childbirth to a brother who did not survive
THE ENVIRONMENT IN DESCARTES YOUTH
Rene was raised in La Hay en Touraine, France by a nurse and by his maternal grandmother, Jeanne
Sain
the Descartes family acquired nobility and was welloff by the time Rene was born, so he did not seek a
patron
DESCARTES EDUCATIONAL ENVIRONMENT
when Rene was about nine, he went to a Jesuit boarding college of La Flèche at Anjou, where his older
brother was probably already a student
was a devout Catholic
Father Charlet looked after Rene ‘as a second father’ until Rene was 17
DESCARTES’ EDUCATION
under Charlet and tutor Etienne Noel, Rene learned philosophy throughout his education, along with
mathematics, theology, logic, physics and metaphysics
Rene studied law for two years in 161516, and joined the army of Maurice of Nassau (Protestant) in 1618 Rene Descartes 15961650 02/05/2014
LATER EDUCATION
Descartes traveled widely from 1618 to 1627, along the way meeting Isaac Beeckman, who livens anew
Descartes’ interests in science and music and introduces him to some of the intellectuals of the day
mathematicians (Hardy, Morin, Debeaune)
writers (Guez de Balzac)
theologians – mostly Oratorian rigorists (Berulle, Gibieuf)
DESCARTES’ LIFE STORY CONT.
Descartes was involved in the Thirty Years War as a noncombatant
Descartes was a leading figure of the Scientific Revolution, as shown by his regular communications
mainly with Beeckman, Constantijn Huygens, and Marin Mersenne, but also with Galileo, Grotius, Fermat,
Toricelli, and Pascal
ZEITGEIST
the culture is one of growing agnosticism and independency from the Church, relying increasingly on
reason apart from doctrine
Descartes lived mostly in the Dutch Republic, moving several times within the country throughout his
lifetime
always near a Catholic church
life there is mostly safe from persecution of beliefs that went against the established churches
RENE DESCARTES’ REVELATION
on November 10, 1619, he had a revelation in which he “discovered the foundations of a wonderful new
science”
he believed he had been divinely encouraged to establish a universal method of reasoning, based on
mathematical principles, which would guarantee the absolutely certain truth of its results
DESCARTES AND SKEPTICISM
thesis: Descartes proposes to doubt anything that can be doubted, so called ‘hyperbolic’ or ‘exaggerated’
doubt
he finds that nothing can withstand such philosophical doubt Rene Descartes 15961650 02/05/2014
RATIONALISM
rationalism: an epistemological position in which reason is said to the primary source of all knowledge,
superior to the senses
rationalists believe that abstract reasoning can produce undeniable, absolutely certain truths about nature,
existence, and the whole of reality
these truths are calla priori orinnate ideas – because they are discovered independently of
experience, without empirical observation or experimentation
Descartes stands not only as the ‘father of modern philosophy’ but as the original archetype of the modern
rationalist
APPLYING RATIONALISM
can we trust received wisdom passed down by authorities (eg., the Church)?
for every opinion held by any reputable human being, there is a contrary opinion that has been held by
equally reputable human beings
every idea that now seems foolish has been, at some other time or place, regarded as absolute truth by
reputable authorities
generally, what human beings regard as certain varies according to history and culture
conclusion: contrary to the authoritarian, no human being can be regarded as having some special insight
into the truth
WHERE DOES KNOWLEDGE COME FROM?
HOW do we know what we know?
Common sense often answers “we know through sense perception and learn through other people’s
experiences”
There are also things I know just be reasoning abstractly
DESCARTES ARGUES WHY WE SHOULDN’T TRUST OUR SENSES
the senses are not a reliable source of knowledge, since they have deceived in the past (optical illusions
and the like)
ordinary experience of the world seems to be completely replicated in dreams, and there is not certain
way to distinguish dreams from waking experience
but the ‘world’ of a dream seems real but is not Rene Descartes 15961650 02/05/2014
WHAT IF THERE IS A POWERFUL DEMON?
the conclusions of mathematical sciences, that deal with general quantitative facts seems to be least
subject to doubt
however, even mathematical truths might be doubted if a very powerful God, or a demon, were
deliberately deceiving people
A BASIC DICHOTOMY
empiricist foundationalism: the senses provide the ultimate criteria for justifying belief (and as shown
Descartes rejects this premise)
rationalist foundationalism: the senses give subjective or even deceptive appearances, and only
reason provides a foundation for certain knowledge
DESCARTES’ ANALYTIC APPROACH
for distinguishing truth from falsehoods and building scientific knowledge on a solid foundation
the aim: accept nothing as true except what is apprehended so clearly and distinctly as to be beyond
any doubt
the method:
divide each difficulty into as many separate parts as is possible and necessary to resolve them
begin with the objects that are the simplest and the easiest to know, and gradually ascend to the most
complex and difficult – evassume such an order if none exists naturally
make such a complete review and enumeration, at the end, as to be sure that nothing important has been
omitted
THE CARTESIAN SKEPTICAL METHOD (“RADICAL DOUBT”)
turning doubt against itself
Descartes asked: what would happen if I systematically attempted to doubt absolutely everything?
could such an attempt really succeed?
or would I discover that there are certain principles that it is absolutely impossible to doubt?
if I begin by treating all my ideas as false, will I discover that my mind contains ideas that bear
unmistakable marks of truth?
STANDARD OF TRUTH Rene Descartes 15961650 02/05/2014
Descartes proposed that only those things we can accept as ‘clear and distinct’ should be accepted as
true
‘clear’ he defined as ‘that which is present and apparent to an attentive mind’
‘distinct’ he defined as ‘that which is so precise and different from all other objects that it contains within
itself nothing but what is clear’
what he has in mind are examples from geometry and mathematics, which he felt should serve as the
standard of truth
INNATE IDEAS
a priori knowledge: knowledge that is known ‘prior’ to or independently of sense experience
a posteriori knowledge: knowledge that is known ‘after’ or dependent upon sense experience
to Descartes, we can know some things are a priori because they are innate (that is, they have been
implanted in our minds by God)
Descartes gives as an example the idea of a triangle
CAN ANYTHING BE SAID TO BE TRUE?
after calling everything he perceives into doubt, Descartes wonders whether he can call his own existence
into doubt as well
but he finds that this is impossible
for in order for him to doubt himself, he must go through the process of doubting (which, for Descartes, is
a process of thinking)
this means that he has found something certain: himself as a thinking thing (or a mind)
the famous Latin sentence, “Cogito, ergo sum”, literally means “I think, therefore I am”
in other words – I cannot doubt my existence since I have to be the thing doubting if doubting is being
done
THE INNATE IDEA OF GOD
at this point, there are two things whose existence Descartes is assured of: himself as a thinking thing and
his innate idea of God
but even if he cannot doubt the existence of his own mind, he knows he is not responsible for its existence
he also knows that he is not responsible for the existence of his innate idea of an infinitely perfect being,
since he is a finite, imperfect being
that suggests that the source of both Descartes’ mind and its innate idea of an infinitely perfect being is
God Rene Descartes 15961650 02/05/2014
that is, that God actually exists
THE MIND AND THE BODY
once Descartes is assured of his own existence and that of God’s, everything else falls into place
the world is roughly as he perceives it, since God cannot be an evil genius and be the infinitely perfect
being Descartes has in mind
also, the mind and the body are two distinct things, since that is the way Descartes perceives them as
being, and he now knows he is not being deceived about such things
he is a mind thinking about the physical objects he perceives all around him, and can now be certain that
science is getting the world roughly right
DESCARTES: MIND AND BODY
extension is the property of taking up space
if something has a size or shape, it is ‘extended’
according to Descartes, the body (like all bodies or objects) is extended but not thinking
the mind is thinking but not extended
CARTESIAN DUALISM
the spiritual part of man is his mind, his soul
it is not confined in any spatiotemporal way
matter, including a human body, although it was created by God and put into its proper places and motion,
now acts according to mechanical laws and forces
therefore, nature, including human bodies, can be studied with science and mathematics without
theological underpinnings
DESCARTES AND DUALISM
according to dualism, what is responsible for thinking and consciousness is not the brain (which takes up
space and is physical) but rather the mind, which is not physical
the physical brain is closely connected with the nonphysical mind, but they are still different things Rene Descartes 15961650 02/05/2014
PROBLEM
if Descartes is right, that mind is distinct from body, what is their relationship?
each affects the other – ‘interaction’:
physical injury causes mental pain
mental decisions cause physical actions
DESCARTES AND DUALISM
according to Descartes, the eyes perceive objects and then focus the image on a central part of the brain
this part of the brain then ‘transmits’ the information to the nonphysical mind
the mind may then transmit back a signal telling the brain and body how to move or act 02/05/2014
EMPIRICISM
the content of our mind comes from experience
extreme position is that there are NO INNATE IDEAS
rejecting innate ideas meant that the mind is empty at birth
assuming that the mind is atabula rasa (blank slate) denies that anything is knowable without reference
to experience
MAJOR FIGURES IN THE BRITISH SCHOOL OF EMPIRICISM
Thomas Hobbes
John Locke
George Berkeley
David Hume
James Mill
J.S. Mill
Alexander Bain
THOMAS HOBBES (15881679)
Hobbes’ political philosophy:
government necessary to control innate tendencies of selfishness, aggressiveness, and greediness
proposed a hedonistic theory of motivation
appetite, seeking or maintaining pleasure; aversion, avoidance or termination of pain drove human behavior
there is no free will
a strict deterministic view of behavior
complex thought processes resulted from law of contiguity (originating with Aristotle)
attention: sense organs retain the motion caused by certain external objects 02/05/2014
imagination: sense impressions decay over time
JOHN LOCKE (16321704)
all ideas come from sensory experience – there are no innate ideas
an idea is a mental image employed while thinking and comes from either sensation (direct sensory
stimulation) or reflection (reflection on remnants of prior sensory stimulation)
sensation is the source of ideas
these ideas can be acted upon by operations of the mind giving rise to new ideas
operations of the mind
include perception, thinking, doubting, believing, reasoning, knowing, and willing
these operations are innate – a part of human nature
simple ideas cannot be divided further while complex ideas are composites of simple ideas and can be
analyzed into parts
complex ideas formed through reflective operations on simple ideas
feelings
pleasure and pain accompany simple and complex ideas
other emotions are derived from these two basic feelings
primary qualities: ideas related to physical attributes of objects
solidarity, extension, shape, motion, and quantity
secondary qualities: unrelated to the objects in the real world
color, sound, temperature, and taste
LOCKE: SUMMARY
epistemological empiricism: there’s nothing in the intellect that wasn’t previously in the senses
according to Locke, the mind at birth is tabula rasa
no ideas are innate 02/05/2014
Locke applies Ockham’s Razor to innate ideas: we can explain everything we know without invoking innate
ideas (our senses are enough), so innate ideas are unnecessary
metaphysical nominalism: only particular things exist (not concepts, abstractions, forms, etc.)
psychological atomism: according to Locke, the ultimate building blocks of knowledge are simple, discrete
perceptual units (his ‘simple ideas’)
‘simple’ here means ‘from a single sense’, and thus not able to be broken down into smaller constituent
parts
three kinds of complex ideas are built from simple ones:
compounds
relations
abstractions
abstraction: mental process by which general ideas are generated from particular ideas
only possible if we have some innate faculty of recognizing resemblances – a problem for Locke, who
rejects all innate ideas
GEORGE (BISHOP) BERKELEY (16851753)
experience is the source of most knowledge (except knowledge of self and knowledge of God)
all and only perceptions (qualities) are experienced
according to Berkeley, all experience is conscious, or, mental
we experience only ‘ideas’
we never have direct experience of things themselves
there is no way to distinguish primary and secondary qualities
all qualities are secondary (the object for me)
measurable qualities (primary) are just as ‘subjective’ as color and taste, since all qualities are ‘in my head’
but our experiences appear to be consistent with the experience of (supposed) ‘other people’
things appear to exist continuously, they do not appear to flash in and out of being dependent on whether
they’re being perceived
this intersubjective agreement and apparent continuity of perception is due to the watchful attention of God
– the great perceiver who never looks away
we can thus derive knowledge of the existence of God from a transcendental argument (God must exist for
our experience to be what it is) 02/05/2014
Berkeley also accepts the Cartesian view that we know our own existence innately
BERKELEY’S ASSOCIATIONIST IDEAS
all sensations that are consistently together (contiguity) become associated
Berkeley’s theory of distance perception: for distance to be judged, several sensations from different
modalities must be associated
for example: viewing an object and the tactile sensation of walking toward it
DAVID HUME (17111776)
philosophy
contents of the mind come from experience
can be stimulated by either external or internal events
distinguished between impressions and ideas
impressions: strong, vivid perceptions
ideas
weak perceptions
faint images in thinking & reasoning
simple ideas cannot be broken down further (like Locke)
complex ideas made up of other ideas
once in the mind, ideas can be rearranged in an infinite number of ways because of the imagination
three laws of association
laws of resemblance, contiguity and cause and effect
causation is not in reality, not a logical necessity; it is a psychological experience
the mind
it is no more than perceptions we are having at any given moment 02/05/2014
passions determine behavior
all humans possess the same passion (emotions)
but all humans differ in degree of specific emotions
therefore, we respond differently to situations
animals and humans learn to act in ways through experience with reward and punishment
DAVID HARTLEY (17051757)
simple and complex ideas
simple ideas become associated by contiguity to form complex ideas
complex ideas can become associated with other complex ideas to form ‘decomplex’ ideas
laws of association
they can be applied to behavior to describe how voluntary behavior can develop from involuntary behavior
proposed that excessive nerve vibration produced pain and mild to moderate vibration produced pleasure
objects, events, and people become associated with pain or pleasure through experience, and we learn to
behave differentially to these stimuli
JAMES MILL (17731836)
when ideas are continuously experienced together, the association may become so strong that they
appear as one idea
strength of associations is determined by:
vividness of the sensations or ideas
by the frequency of the associations
JOHN STEWART MILL (18061873)
proposed a mental chemistry in which complex ideas are not made up of aggregates of simple ideas but
that ideas can fuse to produce an idea that is completely different from the elements of which it is made 02/05/2014
ALEXANDER BAIN (18181903)
he was a Scottish philosopher and educational theorist
often referred to as the first fullfledged psychologist
goal was to describe the physiological correlates of mental and behavioral phenomena
the mind assumed to have three components:
feelings, volition, intellect
intellect is explained by the laws of association
primarily the law of contiguity which applies to sensations, ideas, actions, and feelings
contiguity supplemented by the law of frequency
the laws had their effect in neuronal changes in the nervous system
two other laws of association
law of compound association
single ideas are not associated, rather an idea is usually associated with several other ideas through
contiguity or similarity
law of constructive association
mind can rearrange memories of experiences into an almost infinite number of combinations, accounts for
creativity
explanation of voluntary behavior
when a need arises, spontaneous or random activity is produced
some of those movements will produce approximate conditions necessary to satisfy the need but other
movements will not
activities which produce need satisfaction are remembered
when in similar situation again, the activities which previously produced need satisfaction will be performed 02/05/2014
GOTTFRIED VON LEIBNIZ (16461716)
Leibniz’s mathematical discoveries
infinitesimal calculus
determinant calculus
binary system
WHAT IS CALCULUS?
calculus derives rules for calculations
problems solved by calculus include finding areas, volumes (integral calculus), tangents, normal and
curvatures (differential calculus), and summing of infinite series
this makes calculus applicable in a wide variety of areas inside and outside mathematics
LEIBNIZ
invented a calculator
conceptualized the design from 16711673
basically a mechanical device, it was used for three centuries until the advent of the electronic calculator in
the mid 1970s
he had a machine called the Stepped Reckoner, built based on that design in 1694
LEIBNIZ AND THE HISTORY OF PSYCHOLOGY
first work was a rebuttal of Locke (wrote in 1704 but not published until 50 years later, after Leibniz’ death)
with Locke’s death in 1704, he saw no point in carrying on a dispute
took an extreme view of Locke, emphasizing the tabula rasa aspects (and ignoring the reflective aspects
Locke attributed to the mind)
LEIBNIZ’ REBUTTAL
rejected the idea that any ideas come from experience 02/05/2014
argued that nothing material (such as activation of a sensory receptor) could ever cause an idea, which is
nonmaterial
because ideas cannot be created by anything physical (such as a brain), the mind must have the potential
to have an idea (experience only actualizes a preexistent idea)
LEIBNIZ’S MONADOLOGY
in ‘The Monafology’, Leibniz described a system of monads
monads are an infinite number of elements composing all beings and activity, with no parts, not
decomposable
monads are indestructible, uncreatable, immutable
the physical and mental worlds are pluralisms of independent monads that do not interact, in parallel
there is a continuum of consciousnessunconsciousness with different levels of activity, with a threshold of
consciousness
his work with calculus: one can imagine an object being cut into an infinite number of slices
microscopes had been recently invented: there is life evident that cannot be seen with the naked eye
envisions something like a living atom (a monad)
an infinite number of them, active and conscious
can only be created or destroyed by God
all monads are active and conscious BUT
they vary in the clarity and distinctiveness of the thoughts they are capable of having (a natural hierarchy)
hierarchy from plants to microbes to lower animals to humans to God (differences are quantitative not
qualitative)
each organism has a soul/mind (dominant monad) that determines its intellectual potential
remember ideas only exist at potentialities
the only way a monad can change is by internal development – by actualizing their potential
so what of mindbody dichotomy
rejected Descartes interactionism
suggested psychophysical parallelism based on preestablished harmony (part of God’s plan) 02/05/2014
LEIBNIZ AND CONSCIOUSNESS
argued that ‘nature never makes leaps’
that is, events are continuous (eg., one could never traverse a certain line or distance without first traversing
a shorter one)
this holds for perceptions as well
there is activity below the level of consciousness (when reaches awareness = apperception)
introduces concept of perceptual threshold (limen)
LEIBNIZ ON SUBSEQUENT PSYCHOLOGICAL INQUIRY
hierarchy of consciousness: encourages the study of consciousness in animals
threshold: became important in later work on psychophysics
unconscious perception: important for later work like the growth of psychoanalysis
SIR ISAAC NEWTON (16431727)
the years 166466 were the most important in Newton’s mathematical development
by 1664 he became familiar with mathematical works of Descartes, Viète and Wallis and began his own
investigations
he received his bachelor’s degree in 1665
when the University was closed in the summer of 1665 because of the plague in England, Newton had to
return to Lincolnshire
at that time, Newton completely devoted himself to mathematics
Newton’s fundamental works on calculus “A treatise of the methods of series and fluxions”
(1671) and “On analysis by equations unlimited in their number of terms” (1669) were rejected
for publication
nevertheless some people recognized his genius
Isaac Barrow resigned the Lucasian Chair (Cambridge) in 1669 and recommended that Newton be
appointed in his place
Newton’s first work as Lucasian Prof. was on optics
in particular, using a glass prism Newton discovered the spectrum of white light 02/05/2014
PRIORITY IN SCIENCE
the LeibnizNewton controversy was quite bitter
today: both men are recognized as having ‘invented’ calculus independently
IMMANUEL KANT (17241804)
LIFE AND WORKS
born, grew up, and died in East Prussia
no life of diplomacy, tutoring, no excommunication, pretty quiet
born into family of priests in Koenigsberg, stress simple piety and good works over ceremonies of
organized religion
1740: attended college, studied logic and philosophy
1755: obtained doctorate and license to teach
1770: appointed professor of logic and metaphysics
17551770: pre‘critical’ years
critique of Pure Reason: First Edition published in 1781 – barely noticed
then, in rapid succession, Prolegomena, Groundworks of the Metaphysics of Morals, Metaphysical First
Principles of Natural Science, Second Edition of First Critique (1787), the Critique of Practical Reason
(1790), Critique of Judgment (1793)
HUME AWAKENS KANT FROM ‘DOGMATIC SLUMBERS’
Hume: strong empiricist, disputed the notion that even such a basic concept as causality is innate
‘the ideas that every effect has a cause’ was disputed
Hume argued the truth value of this assertion cannot be deduced in a priori fashion, but only from
experience, and only as a subjective necessity
KANT ON ‘EXPERIENCE’
what would it be like to have sensory experience but with no ability to think about it?
it would not be experiencof anything – the idea of an object is the idea of something that is unified,
existing in space and time 02/05/2014
what makes intelligible experience, of objects, possible?
Kant’s answer: certain basic concepts, under which sensory input falls, provide experience
Kant calls these concepts ‘categories’
this conceptual scheme is necessary for any intelligible experience at all; ie., necessary for experience of
objects
how does Kant show this?
KANT AND CAUSALITY
to experience a (physical) world of objects, we must be able to distinguish the temporal order of our
experiences from the temporal order of events
compare two easily made judgments:
look around the room – your perceptual experience changes, but the room itself has not changed
imagine watching a ship sail downstream – your perceptual experience changes, and you say that the
scene itself has changed (the ship has moved)
how can we make this judgment?
The room: we could have had the perceptions in a different order, without the room being different
The ship: we could not have had the perceptions in a different order, unless the ship was moviin a
different way
With the ship, the order of perceptual experience is fixed by the order of events
The order must occur as it does
this is the idea of a ‘necessary temporal order’, which is captured by the concept CAUSALITY
effects must follow causes – where one event does not repeatedly follow another, there is no causal link
between the events
CAUSALITY is the concept that events happen in a necessary order
without this concept, I cannot distinguish between the order of my perceptions (my perceptions changing)
and the order of events (objects changing)
but this distinction is needed to experience objects at all
so CAUSALITY is necessary for experience
CONCEPTUAL SCHEME 02/05/2014
concepts such as ‘causality’ are aspects of ‘the pure thought of an object’
they are not derived from experience, but logically precede experience – hence they are a priori and
innate, part of the structure of the mind
we do not apply these concepts (such as causality) to experience – there is no experience without these
concepts
at best, there is a ‘confused buzz’ – but do you experience a confused buzz? Does it even truly occur, at
some moment before applying the concepts?
all conceptual schemes must include the categories – this is not given by empirical argument, but a priori
argument
MIND AND WORLD
what is the world like independent of these concepts?
We cannot say, we cannot even imagine
All thought about the world presupposes these concepts
this casts no doubt on the physical world as we experience it – this we can know contains physical
objects, etc.
anything that takes the form of an ‘object’ is something to which our concepts have already been applied
there is nothing we could know here, but don’t
what would it be to know anything without using concepts?
What is experience that is not experience of objects?
PSYCHOLOGICAL COMPLICATIONS
emphasis on the mind creating reality
emphasizing the importance of innate factors on perception, language, problem solving
th
directly influenced the developmental theories in the 20 century of Piaget (who studied the
process wherein concepts and construction of reality develop as one ages) The Growth of Psychology as a Science in Europe (Mainly Germany)
02/05/2014
Two key developments were critical to the beginnings of psychology as a science in the 19 century:
Advances in physiology and its contribution to psychology
The introduction of quantitative measurements of mental processes
HERMANN VON HELMHOLTZ
CALCULATING SPEED OF NERVE CONDUCTION
Hermann von Helmholtz (employer and mentor of Wilhelm Wundt) measured speed of nervous
transmission in frogs and humans
in 1852, he measured the speed of a nerve impulse: Helmholtz stimulated a frog’s nerve near a muscle
and then farther away
impulse velocity within the nervous system was calculated at one tenth the speed of sound or 26 meters per
sec.
transmission of impulses across a nerve takes real time, not instantaneous
WITH HUMANS
simple reaction time experiments
a very weak electric shock was applied to the skin
subjects we asked to react with hand movement which registered time to react
he repeated the experiments in different subjects
results varied between a mean of 0.12 and 0.20 seconds
TOTAL REACTION TIME IS A FUNCTION OF SUBTIMES
1. one part of the time between stimulation and reaction was consumed by the ‘sending of the signal’ (ie.,
the stimulus) through the sensory nerves
2. another portion of time (which Helmholtz assumed to be the same time as the first) was needed to
transmit the ‘message’ through the motor nerves to the muscle
3. the remaining part of time, Helmholtz concluded, was the time required ‘in the brain for the processes of
perceiving and willing’
the time for a person to react is made up of smaller reaction times The Growth of Psychology as a Science in Europe (Mainly Germany)
02/05/2014
SPEED OF NERVE CONDUCTION IN HUMANS
the procedure Helmholtz then used was to stimulate the human body in different places (eg., in the toe
and the thigh)
he could then measure the relative differences in time to respond to a stimuli at different points on the
body
the processing time within the sensory nerves (assuming brain processes and motor proces
More
Less
