WEEK 1
Philosophy of the Humanities 1: Lecture
Instrumental approach
- Philosophical insights/frameworks instruments for reflection
(p.35)
o Pays attention to the way instruments can be used to
translate into knowledge
o Instruments: Telescope (technology) and even sentences
Instruments can even be considered as even the
sentences which describe knowledge
Active participants of translating the world into
knowledge
Logical Empiricism: historical context
- The turn to logical empiricism was understood:
o The inherent mystification
o Understood their task as getting rid of bad forms of
philosophy that couldn’t be reversely verifiable
o Make philosophy more scientific and rational
o Trying to understand the rise of fascism to create a more
just world
- They would reconstruct scientific results through a highly
rigorous and logic writing
- The only grounds for truth is sense experience
o Beyond that, that cannot be translated into a sentence is
essentially meaningless
o Get rid of meaningless
- The “nothing”
o We can’t go and see it … its just beyond our ability to see
it (Heidegger)
o “Where do we seek the nothing” (p.76)
- Must verify through induction
Popper’s attack on logical empiricism
- The verification criteria is useless for distinguishing universal
laws
o The is always a counter statement
- Popper: it’s impossible to test every instant of every universal
law
⁃ Deviation is always possible
- Solution to demarcation problem : Is not induction, IT IS
FALSIFICATION THROUGH DEDUCTION
, - Popper wants to capture the nature and growth of scientific
knowledge
o You cannot justify induction as there is always a gap
Falsifiability (Popper)
- Start with a larger hypothesis, and find pro and con statements
o Most importantly stamens which falsifies it as it grows a
better hypothesis
o They start with a hypothesis which is informed by a
theory as it gives the hypothesis reason (NOT A BAD
THING)
It means at each level is that there is room for
falsifiability
- There is no such thing as neutral observation
- More falsifiability = good theory
Kuhn’s alternative (the structure of scientific revolution)
- “Contrary to Popper, he argued that scientists working in normal science do not try
to refute their theories, but on the contrary, precisely try to elaborate and refine
them”(p.119)
o In daily normal science, communicating it to other scientists… there is little
need for falsifiability
- BOTH AGREE that any scientific practice can be falsifiable with counter examples
- Paradigm
o The rules/practices of the discipline
o There is a shift once every thirty years within the natural sciences
- Paradigm choice
o It’s not possible to think outside of a paradigm which doesn’t exist
o You can have a hypothesis outside of a paradigm
Philosophy of the Humanities 1: Seminar 15/02/22
, Week 1 : Plato
Why is this program (media studies) in the humanities?
Reading philosophy
- Situate the text (contextualise)
o Is it a journal? Year?
- Read the text once…. Then again
o Underline the important lines
Defining!
Mark words you don’t understand and share
- Take notes
o Seminar questions
o Summaries key ideas
o Links with other texts?
The allegory of the cave
- Plato is against
o Democracy
o Ignorance
o Illusion
o Sophism
Type of “philosophers” (Ex. Seminar Professor)
Using clear logic to create false theories
Use rhetoric (philosophy) to achieve an end (objective) not for the
sake of truth
Means (philosophy) -> End (goal)
- Plato is for
o Truth
I look for knowledge because that is the ultimate goal of human
beings
Reason and knowledge produces Truth
- Plato’s Ideas
o He beloved that the root of knowledge and truth is up there in the world of
ideas (not the material work)
This material world is the imperfect version of the world of ideas
o Aristotle thought the opposite where knowledge if found down here on earth
(material world)
- Style
o Socratic dialogue
o A play type of format
- Plato’s ideas of education
o Learning is remembering
You can learn using reason and Plato asking students questions so
that they remember what they knew in the perfect world of ideas
This is the opposite of a Sophist
- What is the main aim of “the republic”? JUSTICE! (What is justice?)
Philosophy of the Humanities 1: Lecture
Instrumental approach
- Philosophical insights/frameworks instruments for reflection
(p.35)
o Pays attention to the way instruments can be used to
translate into knowledge
o Instruments: Telescope (technology) and even sentences
Instruments can even be considered as even the
sentences which describe knowledge
Active participants of translating the world into
knowledge
Logical Empiricism: historical context
- The turn to logical empiricism was understood:
o The inherent mystification
o Understood their task as getting rid of bad forms of
philosophy that couldn’t be reversely verifiable
o Make philosophy more scientific and rational
o Trying to understand the rise of fascism to create a more
just world
- They would reconstruct scientific results through a highly
rigorous and logic writing
- The only grounds for truth is sense experience
o Beyond that, that cannot be translated into a sentence is
essentially meaningless
o Get rid of meaningless
- The “nothing”
o We can’t go and see it … its just beyond our ability to see
it (Heidegger)
o “Where do we seek the nothing” (p.76)
- Must verify through induction
Popper’s attack on logical empiricism
- The verification criteria is useless for distinguishing universal
laws
o The is always a counter statement
- Popper: it’s impossible to test every instant of every universal
law
⁃ Deviation is always possible
- Solution to demarcation problem : Is not induction, IT IS
FALSIFICATION THROUGH DEDUCTION
, - Popper wants to capture the nature and growth of scientific
knowledge
o You cannot justify induction as there is always a gap
Falsifiability (Popper)
- Start with a larger hypothesis, and find pro and con statements
o Most importantly stamens which falsifies it as it grows a
better hypothesis
o They start with a hypothesis which is informed by a
theory as it gives the hypothesis reason (NOT A BAD
THING)
It means at each level is that there is room for
falsifiability
- There is no such thing as neutral observation
- More falsifiability = good theory
Kuhn’s alternative (the structure of scientific revolution)
- “Contrary to Popper, he argued that scientists working in normal science do not try
to refute their theories, but on the contrary, precisely try to elaborate and refine
them”(p.119)
o In daily normal science, communicating it to other scientists… there is little
need for falsifiability
- BOTH AGREE that any scientific practice can be falsifiable with counter examples
- Paradigm
o The rules/practices of the discipline
o There is a shift once every thirty years within the natural sciences
- Paradigm choice
o It’s not possible to think outside of a paradigm which doesn’t exist
o You can have a hypothesis outside of a paradigm
Philosophy of the Humanities 1: Seminar 15/02/22
, Week 1 : Plato
Why is this program (media studies) in the humanities?
Reading philosophy
- Situate the text (contextualise)
o Is it a journal? Year?
- Read the text once…. Then again
o Underline the important lines
Defining!
Mark words you don’t understand and share
- Take notes
o Seminar questions
o Summaries key ideas
o Links with other texts?
The allegory of the cave
- Plato is against
o Democracy
o Ignorance
o Illusion
o Sophism
Type of “philosophers” (Ex. Seminar Professor)
Using clear logic to create false theories
Use rhetoric (philosophy) to achieve an end (objective) not for the
sake of truth
Means (philosophy) -> End (goal)
- Plato is for
o Truth
I look for knowledge because that is the ultimate goal of human
beings
Reason and knowledge produces Truth
- Plato’s Ideas
o He beloved that the root of knowledge and truth is up there in the world of
ideas (not the material work)
This material world is the imperfect version of the world of ideas
o Aristotle thought the opposite where knowledge if found down here on earth
(material world)
- Style
o Socratic dialogue
o A play type of format
- Plato’s ideas of education
o Learning is remembering
You can learn using reason and Plato asking students questions so
that they remember what they knew in the perfect world of ideas
This is the opposite of a Sophist
- What is the main aim of “the republic”? JUSTICE! (What is justice?)
