Philosophy
5: Critical Thinking and Composition
Los Angeles Pierce College
Department of History, Philosophy, & Sociology
Lecture Notes
Lecture Notes for Week Fifteen
0) Assignments
1) Russell's "The
Argument from Analogy for Other Minds"
2) Group Exercise
1) Russell's "The
Argument from Analogy for Other Minds"
We feel and think & others
feel and think.
Analogy
"It is clear that we
must appeal to something that may be vaguely called 'analogy.' The behaviour
of other people is in many ways analogous to our own, and we suppose that it
must have analogous causes."
Inference
"This is a boring
lecture," uttered by a colleague of yours, would be said
by you if you had the thought that this lecture is boring, and so you infer
that they too think that this lecture is boring.
Behavior
Your colleague yawns, and
this too is evidence that they are bored, as you have yawned when you are
bored.
"There are, in short,
very many ways in which my responses to stimuli differ from those of 'dead'
matter, and in all these ways other people resemble me."
Similar Causes
Thoughts cause, in a
law-governed way, my behavior.
And "it is natural to
infer that the same is true of the analogous behaviour
of my friends."
Knowledge
Russell's goal is to
determine what kind of knowledge we can have of others' thoughts, feelings, and
thoughts.
Doubt
Here, we will be dealing with
levels of doubt, not certitude.
Behavior is Insufficient
Notice that human behaviors
can occur in the (immediate, at least) absence of a live human: MP3 players,
televisions, and the like all evince human behavior, but they often times like
an immediate live human.
Robots
And we can imagine (easily
now-a-days) very lifelike robots that evince all sorts of human behavior that
are nevertheless not backed, so to speak, by a living human.
But How Do You Know?
And how do we know that an
MP3, heard through an MP3 player, is not evidence of occurrent
thought by some living human (or humanlike creature)?
Behavioral Differences
Well, there are behavioral
differences between the two
The Difference
"One of the most notable
peculiarities of human behaviour is change of
response to a given stimulus."
But
That difference is not enough
to prove that "there are 'thoughts' connected with living bodies other
than my own."
External Observation Materialism
"It is probably possible
theoretically to account for the behaviour of living
bodies by purely physical causal laws, and it is probably impossible to refute
materialism by external observation alone."
Inner Observation
Taking inner observation into
consideration, we must appeal to inferences from the relationship between our
own thoughts and behaviors to others' thoughts corresponding to their
observable behaviors.
Rational Connection
We need a rational connection
between behaviors we externally observe in others, and the thoughts, beliefs,
feelings, and experiences we cannot externally observe in others.
Self Observation
"We know, from
observation of ourselves, a causal law of the form 'A causes B,' where A is a
'thought' and B a physical occurrence."
When I think to myself,
"I am fat," that causes me to suck in my gut.
A: thought "I am fat"
Causes
B: behavior of sucking in gut
Other Observation
I see a colleague sit up and
suck in his gut when I enter a room.
I infer the thought "I
am fat" in my colleague
Evidence
The more evidence I observe,
the less doubtful my inference.
Certitude
For me to have certain
knowledge, my inference would have to conclude that I had isolated the only
cause behind my colleague's behavior.
But there are other, possible
causes.
Probability
"Or, if we are content
to infer that A is probable, it will suffice if we can know that in most cases
it is A that causes B."
Evidence & Probability
Our inference is more
probable when we find complementary evidence.
My colleague, for instance,
could utter at the very same time that he sucks his gut in, "I feel so fat."
Inference w/Certitude
"From subjective
observation I know that A, which is a thought or feeling, causes B, which is a
bodily act, e.g. a statement. I
know also that, whenever B is an act of my own body, A is its cause. I now observe an act of the kind B in a
body not my own, and I am having no thought or feeling of the kind A. But I still believe, on the basis of
self-observation, that only A can cause B; I therefore infer that there was an
A which caused B, though it was not an A that I could observe."
Conclusion
"On this ground I infer
that other people's bodies are associated with minds, which resemble mine in
proportion as their bodily behaviour resembles my
own."
Doubts
Yet,
"We cannot be sure that,
in our subjective experience, A is the only cause of B."
"And even if A is the
only cause of B in our experience, how can we know that this holds outside our
experience?"
Mere Probability Is Sufficient
"It is not necessary
that we should know this with any certainty; it is enough if it is highly
probable."
Inference w/Probability
"If, whenever we can
observe whether A and B are present or absent, we find that every case of B has
an A as a causal antecedent, then it is probable that most B's have A's as
causal antecedents, even in cases where observation does not enable us to know
whether A is present or not."
Conclusion
"This postulate, if
accepted, justifies the inference to other minds, as well as many other
inferences that are made unreflectingly by common sense."
2) Group Exercise
Group
Work Summary: In groups discuss your final essay's purpose, and parts.
Step
0 (in one minute): Identify yourself as being in position 1, 2, or 3.
Position
1: I know what the purpose and parts of my final essay are.
Position
2: I know what the purpose or parts of my final essay are, but not both.
Position
3: I do not know what the purpose and parts of my final essay are.
Step
1 (ten minutes): Individually, write out your final essay's purpose on a piece
of paper. As best you can, distinguish parts of your essay that will by synthesized
to achieve your purpose. Invent
what you don't have.
Step
2 (ten minutes): In groups (corresponding to your position), discuss your
individual essay's purpose, in turn.
Step
3 (ten minutes): In the same groups, discuss your individual essay's parts, in
turn.
Step
4 (ten to twenty minutes): In your original (pre-group) seats, we
collectively discuss the fruits of our labor. Did you change your
position?
Lecture Notes for Week Fourteen
0) Assignments
1) Sequence Reading: "Chapter 4: Argument Synthesis"
2) Analogical Arguments
3) Implicit Bias in the News
4) On the Problem of Empathy & Edith Stein
5) Group Exercise
1) "Chapter 4" "Argument
Synthesis"
Support
The ability to persuade
frequently depends on the ability to support one's conclusions.
Synthetic
In synthetic arguments,
multiple sources are employed.
Theses Needed
The thesis in an
argumentative synthesis "is a claim about which reasonable people could
disagree."
"It is a claim with
whichŠgiven the right argumentsŠyour audience might be persuaded to
agree."
"The strategy of your
argument synthesis is therefore to find and use convincing support for your
claim."
"The Elements of Argument" "Claim, Support
and Assumption"
Claim
"A claim is a proposition
or conclusion that you are trying to prove."
Support
"You prove your claim by
using support in the form of fact, statistics, or expert opinion."
Assumption
"Linking your supporting
evidence to your claim is your assumption about the subject."
An assumption in this context
"is an underlying belief or principle about some aspect of the world and
how it operates."
Logic
"For the most part,
arguments should be constructed logically so that assumptions link evidence
(supporting facts, statistics, and expert opinions) to claims."
"The Three Appeals of Arguments" "Logos, Ethos,
Pathos"
Academic Settings
"[I]n academic writing,
the appeal to logic (logos) is by far the most commonly used appeal."
Logos
"Logos is the rational
appeal, the appeal to reason."
Effectiveness
"If writers and speakers
expect to persuade their audiences, they must argue logically and must supply
appropriate evidence to support their case."
Forms
Deductive Inductive
Reasoning
Deductive
"The deductive argument
begins with a generalization, then cites a specific case related to that
generalization from which follows a conclusion."
Inductive
The inductive argument begins
with "several pieces of specific evidence" and then concludes on the
basis of that evidence.
Ethos
"Ethos, or the ethical
appeal, is based not on the ethics relating to the subject under discussion,
but rather on the ethical status of the person making the argument."
Presenter's Credibility
"A person making an
argument must have a certain degree of credibility: That person must be of good
character, have a sound sense, and be qualified to argue based either on expert
experience with the subject matter or on carefully conducted
research."
Composition Students' Credibility
"Students writing in
academic settings establish their appeal to ethos by developing presentations
that are well organized, carefully reasoned, and thoroughly referenced with
source citations."
Pathos
Pathos is an appeal to
emotions.
Academic
It is rarely employed well in
academic settings, and is usually found in popular arguments.
"The emotional appeal
becomes problematic only when it is the sole or primary basis of the
argument."
Limits
Logos is frequently
insufficient in the goal of persuasion.
"In the real world,
arguments don't operate like academic debates."
Comparing and Contrasting
Sometimes it is valuable to
compare and contrast, either when executing an explanatory synthesis or an
argumentative synthesis.
Here, you "examine two
subjects (or sources) [or cities] in terms of one another."
Subtleties
Frequently you will end up
illuminating subtleties with your "multifaceted analysis" in
comparing and contrasting.
Criteria
You'll need criteria for
analysis, and this frequently comes from reading sources about the entities
being compared and contrasted.
Criterion
In this case, a
"criterion is a specific point to which both of your authors refer and
about which they may agree or disagree."
Best Criteria
The best criteria allow you,
of course, to do the comparing and contrasting, "but also to plumb deeper,
exploring subtle yet significant comparisons and contrasts among details or
subcomponents, which you can then relate to your overall thesis."
Orphan
Comparing and contrasting
should not be abandoned; it is an effort that should almost always serve a
different purpose, either to explain, persuade, or analyze.
Organizing
There are two main ways of
comparing and contrasting: organization by source as opposed to organized by
criteria.
By Source
When you organize by source
you summarize the things you are comparing and contrasting first, in order, and
then discuss their similarities and their differences.
By Criteria
When you organize by criteria
you "discuss two sources simultaneously, examining the view of each
[source] point by point (criterion by criterion), comparing and contrasting
these views in the process."
2) Analogical Arguments
Analogical Arguments
" ... declare a
relationship between two things, a parallel connection, usually between two
ideas or a set of ideas."
"analogical arguments
compare things that are alike in all essential respects and are then claimed to
be alike in some further respect."
E.G. Copernicus
"It was analogical
thinking that led Copernicus to conceive of a heliocentric rather than a
geocentric solar system. One day
while Copernicus was drifting down a river in a boat, he experienced the
illusion that the bank was moving while his boat remained still. The idea suddenly struck him that it
could also be an illusion that the sun moved around the earth while the earth
remained stationary; perhaps it was the earth that revolved around the
sun. He verified his analogy by experimental
device, and revolutionized our conception of the universe."
E.G. Watchmaker
E.G. State/Soul
E.G. / Camel, Lion,
Toddler
Effectiveness
Follow the rules
Rule One
1) "The two cases
must be alike in all essential respects, and the greater the similarities the
more probable the argument."
"we want to be sure
that we have numerous characteristics that are alike in the cases
compared."
Rule Two
2) "The greater the
number of cases compared, the stronger the probability of the
conclusion."
Rule Three
3) "The greater the
dissimilarity of the cases used as the base of the analogy, the higher the
probability of the conclusion."
"we are concerned to
diversify the cases themselves so that we are not using just one type as a
foundation for the analogy."
3) Implicit Bias in the
News
Stoltze's "3 Things to Know about Police Bias and the LAPD" article from November 16, 2016
4) On the Problem of Empathy & Edith Stein
Section 5(m)
"The Correction of
Empathic Acts"
"If he clenches his fist
or utters an oath as he blushes, I see that he is angry. If he has just stooped or walked
quickly, I empathize a causal context instead of a motivational one."
Section 5(p)
"The Significance of the
Foreign Individual's Constitution for the Constitution of Our Own Psych
Individual"
"To consider ourselves
in inner perception, i.e., to consider our psychic 'I' and its attributes,
means to see ourselves as we see another and as he sees us."
"And, in principle, it
is possible for all the interpretations of myself with which I become
acquainted to be wrong."
"It is possible for
another to 'judge me more accurately' than I judge myself and give me clarity
about myself."
"This is how empathy and
inner perception work hand in hand to give me myself to myself."
Section 5(k)
"Causality in the
Structure of the Individual"
"Let us try to make this
clear by examples of what we having in mind."
"A deliberate decision
on a problem put to me continues to direct the course of my action long after
the actual decision without my being 'conscious' of this as present in current
action."
"Does this mean that an
isolated past experience determines my present experience form that time
on? Not at all."
"This volition that
remained unfulfilled for a long time has not fallen 'into forgottenness'
during this time, has not sunk back into the stream of the past, become 'lived
life' in Scheler's terms."
"It has gone out of the
mode of actuality over into that of non-actuality, out of activity into
passivity."
"Part of the nature of
consciousness is that the cogito, the act in which the 'I' lives, is surrounded
by a marginal one of background experiences in each moment of experience."
"These are
non-actualities no longer or not yet cogito and therefore not accessible to
reflection, either."
"In order to be
comprehended, they must first pass through the form of the cogito, which they
can do at any time."
"They are still
primordially present, even if not actually, and therefore have efficacy."
"The unfulfilled
volition is not dead, but continues to live in the background of consciousness
until its time comes and it can be realized."
"Then its effect
begins."
"Thus it is not
something past which affects the present, but something that reaches into the
present."
"Therefore, we quite
agree that a reproduction of the volition does not set the action in
motion."
"And, indeed, we will go
even further and say that volition would not be in a position to do this at
all."
"A forgotten volition
cannot have an effect, and a 'reproduced' volition is not an alive one, either,
but a represented one."
"As such it is unable to
affect any behavior (as little as in a dark room we can produce the fantasy of
a burning lamp to provide the necessary light for reading)."
"It must first be
relived, lived through again, in order to be able to have an effect."
"Future events which
'throw their shadows in advance' are no different. Scheler gives
an example of James who, under the influence of an unpleasant logic course he
had to teach afternoons, undertook many unnecessary activities the entire day
before simply so that he would find no time for the burdensome
preparation. Yet he did not 'think
about it.' ... Rather, it remains
'in the background' and influences our entire conduct. As a non-actual experience not
specifically direct, this fear has its object in the expected event. This is not completely present, but
constantly tends toward going over into actual experience, toward pulling the
'I' into itself. The fear
constantly resists giving itself into this cogito. Its recue is in other actual experiences
that are sill blocked in their pure course by that
background experience. And of what
finally concerns the efficacy of the whole life on every moment of its
existence [Daseins]
we must say: Everything living into the present can have an effect,
irrespective of how far the initiation of the affective experience is from
'now.' Experiences of early
childhood can also endure into my present, even though pushed in the background
by the profusion of later events.
This can be clearly seen in dispositions toward others persons. I do not 'forget' my friends when I am
not thinking of them. They then
belong to the unnoticed present horizon of my world. My love for them is living even when I
am not living in it. It influences
my actual feelings and conduct. Out
of love for someone, I can abstain from activities which would cause
displeasure without 'being conscious' of this. Likewise, animosity against a person,
inculcated into me in my childhood, can make an impression on my later
life. This is true even though this
animosity is pushed entirely into the background and I do not think of this
person at all any more. Then, when
I meet the animosity again, it can go over into actuality and be discharged in
an action or else be brought to reflective clarity and so be made
ineffectual. On the contrary, what
belongs to my past, what is temporarily or permanently forgotten and can only
come to givenness to me in the character of
representation by reminiscence or by another's account, has no effect on
me. A remembered love is not a
primordial feeling and cannot influence me. If I do someone a favor because of a
past preference, this inclination is based on a positive opinion of this past
preference, not on the represented feeling."
5) Group Exercise
Group
Work Summary: In groups discuss your individual essay's argument, and then work
on coming up with an objection to either your thesis or your support for your
thesis.
Step
0 (in one minute): Identify yourself as being in position 1, 2, or 3.
Position
1: I have a well-developed argument, and I stand in need of a colleague who has
one too, so that we may engage in objection-finding activities together. At
the appropriate time, find two like you.
Position
2: I think I know what I'mma gonna
argue. At the appropriate time, find three you.
Position
3: I do not have an argumentŠperiod. At the appropriate time, find four
like you.
Step
1 (ten minutes): Individually, write out your argument on a piece of
paper. As best you can, distinguish your conclusion from your premise(s). If you donÕt have an argument, invent
one.
Step
2 (ten minutes): In groups (corresponding to your position), discuss your
individual arguments, in turn.
Step
3 (ten minutes): In groups, offer your colleagues, in turn, possible objections
to either their theses or their support for their theses.
Step
4 (ten to twenty minutes): In your original (pre-group) seats, we
collectively discuss the fruits of our labor. Did you change your
position?
Lecture Notes for Week Thirteen
0) Assignments
1) Sequence Reading: "Chapter 5: Analysis"
2) On the Problem of Empathy & Edith
Stein
3) Quiz
0) Assignments
Fourth Essay Due Thursday, December 1
Final Essay Due Thursday, December 15
1) Sequence Reading: "Chapter 5: Analysis"
The Action Analysis is "a type of argument in
which you study the parts of something ... to understand how it works, what it
means, or why it might be significant."
Analytic Tools
Analyzers use "an
analytic too: a principle or definition on the basis of which the subject of
study can be divided into parts and examined."
The Results
The results of analysis
depend on the tool used.
The same subject of study can
be analyzed in different ways, with different analytic tools.
Inasmuch, the "choice of
an analytic tool simultaneously creates and limits the possibilities of
analysis."
Lens Analogy
"It's as if the writer
of an analysis who adopts one analytic tool puts on a pair of glasses and sees
an object in a specific way."
"Another writer, using a
different tool (and a different pair of glasses, sees the object
differently."
The Power of Analysis
" ... it's ability to
reveal objects or events in a way we would not otherwise have
considered."
"Locate and Apply an Analytic Tool"
General Purpose
By now it should be clear:
"The general purpose of all analysis is to enhance one's understanding of
the subject under consideration."
Evaluating Analyses
"A good analysis
provides a valuableŠif sometimes unusual or unexpectedŠpoint of view, a way of
seeing, a way of interpreting some phenomenon, person, event, policy, or
pattern of behavior that otherwise may appear random or
unexplainable."
Writing
The authors give this advice
for those who are tasked with writing an analysis: "consider these to
general strategies:
"[1] Locate an analytic
toolŠa principle or definition that makes a general statement about the way
something works, and
"[2]"
Systematically apply this principle or definition to the subject under
consideration."
Clarity
"[W]hatever
discipline you are working in, the first part of your analysis will clearly
state which (and whose) principles and definitions you are applying."
"For audiences
unfamiliar with these principles, you will need to explain them; if you
anticipate objections to their use, you will need to argue that they are
legitimate principles capable of helping you conduct the analysis."
Practical Advice
1: "Create a context for
your analysis. Introduce and
summarize for the readers the object, event, or behavior to be analyzed. Present a strong case for why an
analysis is needed: Give yourself a motivation to write, and give readers a
motivation to read. Consider
setting out a problem, puzzle, or question to be investigated."
Practical Advice
2. "Locate an analytic
too: a principle or definition that will form the basis of your analysis. Plan to devote an early part of your
analysis to arguing for the validity of this principle or definition if your
audience is not likely to understand it or if they are unlikely to think that
the principle or definition is not valuable."
Practical Advice
3. "Analyze your topic by applying
your selected analytic tool to the topic's component elements. Systematically apply elements of the
analytic tool to parts of the activity or object under study. You can do this by posing specific
questions, based on your analytic principle or definition, about the object or
phenomenon. Discuss what you find
part by part (organized perhaps by questions (, in clearly defined subsections
of the paper."
Practical Advice
4. "Conclude by stating clearly what
is significant about your analysis.
When considering your analytic paper as a whole, what new or interesting
insights have you made concerning the object under study? To what extent has your application of the
definition or principle helped you to explain how the object works, what it
might mean, or why it is significant."
"Formulate a Thesis"
Theses
The thesis for an analysis
essay "compresses into a single sentence the main idea of your
presentation."
For me, a thesis must be
original, interesting, and argumentative.
For me, theses must be
clearly stated.
For me, theses must not only
be clearly stated, but also preferably in the first paragraph (for shorter
essays at least).
"Write an Analysis, Not a Summary"
Mistake to Avoid
"The most common error
made in writing analysisŠan error that is fatal to the formŠis to present
readers with a summary only."
Success
"For analyses to
succeed, you must apply a principle or definition and reach a conclusion about
the object, event, or behavior you are examining."
The Role of Summarizations
"Summary is naturally a
part of analysis; you will need to summarize the object or activity being
examined and, depending on the audience's needs, summarize the principle or
definition being applied."
"But in analysis, you
must take the next step and share insights that suggest the meaning or
significance of some object, event, or behavior."
"Answer the 'So What?' Question"
What Have You Learned?
"Have you learned
anything significant through the analysis?"
"If not, neither will
readers, and they will turn away."
"If you have gained
important insights through your analysis, communicate them clearly."
"At some point, pull
together your related insights and say, in effect, 'Here's how it all adds
up.'"
"When Your Perspective Guides the Analysis"
Personal Perspective
"In some cases a
writer's analysis of a phenomenon or a work of art may not result from anything
as structured as a principle or definition [held by others]. It may follow from the writer's cultural
or personal outlook, perspective, or interests."
Clarity
"If you find yourself
writing an analysis guided by your own insights, not by someone else's, then
you owe your reader a clear explanation of your guiding principles and the
definitions by which you will probe the subject under study."
2) On the Problem of Empathy & Edith Stein
to the end of Chapter II
Empathy is Analogous to Memory
"The memory of joy is
primordial as a representational act now being carried out, though its content
of joy is non-primordial."
"This act has the total
character of joy which I could study, but the joy is not primordially and
bodily there, rather as having once been alive (and this 'once,' the time of
the past experience, can be definite or indefinite)."
I Now I Then
In memory, the I remembering
faces the I remembered.
I remembering is primordially
given.
I remembered is
non-primordially given.
Self-Surrogate
"[I]t is possible for me
to represent a past situation to myself and be unable to remember my inner
behavior in this situation. As I
transfer myself back into this situation, a surrogate for the missing memory
comes into focus."
You've asked yourself before,
haven't you, "What was I thinking?"
Empathy
Similar to memory, in empathy
we see "an act which is primordial as present experience though
non-primordial in content."
Empathic act: primordially
present
Empathized content:
non-primordially present
Object / Content / Subject / Understanding
E.G.: The empathic object is
another's sadness.
The empathic content is that
about which the other is sad.
The empathic subject:
"I am now no longer
turned to the content but to the object of it, am I at the subject of the
content in the original subjects' place"
The empathic understanding of
the content is something even further.
Levels
"These are (1) the
emergence of experience, (2) the fulfilling expectation, and (3) the
comprehensive objectification of the explained experience."
Alterity
"The subject of the
empathized experience, however, is not the subject of the empathizing, but
another."
"These two subjects are
separate and not joined together, as previously [in memory], by a consciousness
of sameness or a continuity of experience."
Non-Primordiality as Empathic
Subject
"And while I am living
in the other's joy, I do not feel primordial joy."
Other's Primordiality
"This other subject is
primordial although I do not experience it as primordial."
Empathy So Far
"Empathy, which we
examined and sought to describe, is the experience of foreign consciousness in
general, irrespective of the kind of the experiencing subject or of the subject
whose consciousness is experienced."
"This is how human being
comprehend the psychic life of their fellows."
Lecture Notes for Week Twelve
To Do:
0) Daryl Davis & the KKK: "'When Two Enemies are
Talking, They're Not Fighting': Meet the Black Man who has Made a Career Out of
Befriending Members of the KKK"
1) Sequence Reading: "Chapter 3: Explanatory Synthesis"
2) On the Problem of Empathy & Edith
Stein
3) Quiz
4) Group Exercise
0) Daryl Davis & the KKK: "'When Two Enemies are
Talking, They're Not Fighting': Meet the Black Man who has Made a Career Out of
Befriending Members of the KKK"
"Davis is credited with
dismantling the Maryland KKK because the group's structure 'fell apart' after
he began making inroads with the men."
"All these relationships
and experiences have been documented in Davis' book, Klan-Destine
Relationships, in which he concludes that the best way to break down barriers
and improve race relations is for people who disagree to sit down and talk."
"'Invite your enemy to
talk - give them a platform to talk because then they will reciprocate,' he
said."
"'Invite your enemies to
sit down and join you."
"'One small thing you
say might give them food for though, and you will
learn.'"
"'Establish dialogue.
ItÕs when the talking stops that the ground becomes fertile for fighting.'"
"'When two enemies are
talking, they're not fighting.'"
1) Sequence
Reading: "Chapter 3:
Explanatory Synthesis"
"A synthesis is a
written discussion that draws on two or more sources."
"In a synthesis, you
make explicit the relationships that you have inferred among separate
sources."
Summarizing Sources
"Readers will frequently
benefit from at least partial summaries of sources in your synthesis
essays."
Beyond Summaries
"At the same time, you
must go beyond summary to make judgementsŠjudgements based on your critical
reading of your sources ... ."
Inferences
"In a synthesis, you go
beyond the critique of individual sources to determine the relationship among
them," via inference.
Parts
In synthesizing sources, you
seldom will synthesize all of a source.
Rather, you select parts for
synthesis.
Which parts?
Purpose
Your purpose in writing
determines which parts of a source you will synthesize.
"Some relationships
among the material in your sources must make them worth synthesizing."
"Your purpose determines
which sources you research, which ones you use, which parts of them you use, at
which points in your paper you use them, and in what manner you relate them to
one another."
Types of Synthesis
Explanatory Synthesis
Argumentative Synthesis
Analogy
"The easiest way to
recognize the difference between the two types [of synthesis] may be to
consider the difference between a news article and an editorial on the same
subject."
Just as news articles seek,
primarily, to inform, explanatory syntheses seek to impartially inform.
And just as editorials seek,
primarily, to interpret information or events, argumentative syntheses present
information to prove some point or interpretation.
Writing a Synthesis
Identify your purpose.
Select sources
accordingly.
Formulate your thesis.
Summarize the relevant parts
of your sources.
Revise your synthesis as
needed, recursively.
Purpose v. Thesis
"The difference between
a purpose and a thesis is primarily a difference in focus."
"Your purpose provides
direction to your research and gives a focus to your paper."
"Your thesis sharpens
this focus by narrowing it and formulating it in the words of a single
declarative statement."
Thesis Placement
"When you write your
synthesis drafts, you will need to consider where your thesis fits in your
paper."
"Sometimes the thesis is
the first sentence, but more often it is the final sentence of the first
paragraph."
I argue that it is best
placed in the middle of your first paragraph, so that you can introduce your
reader to the argument you'll use to support your thesis in the rest of the
first paragraph.
Recursively
"The writing of
syntheses is a recursive process, and you should accept a certain amount of
backtracking and reformulating as inevitable."
"[T]hrough
backtracking and reformulating, you will produce a coherent, well-crafted
paper."
Concluding
Here is a concluding thought
on explanatory syntheses: "Your job in writing an explanatory paperŠor in
writing the explanatory part of an argumentative paper is not to argue a
particular point, but rather to present the facts in a reasonably objective
manner."
2) On the Problem
of Empathy & Edith Stein
"Chapter Two: The
Essence of Acts of Empathy"
Givenness
How are acts of empathy given
to us?
A phenomenological answer is
called for.
The phenomenological reduction
is first needed.
Abeyance
So, we put in abeyance the
actual existence of things: the actual existence of things will not play a
premise role in our thinking.
So, not the actual existence
of ourselves as psycho-physical beings, not the actual existence of other
psycho-physical beings, and not the world "out there."
Retained
What's left over after this
suspension?
"[M]y experience of the
thing (the perception, memory, or other kind of comprehension),"
"together with its correlate, the full 'phenomenon of the thing' (the
object given as the same in series of diverse perceptions or memories)."
"Thus there remains the
whole 'phenomenon of the world' when its positing has been
suspended."
"And these 'phenomena'
are the object of phenomenology."
Am "I" suspended?
Have we gone too far?
My "empirical 'I,'"
with its particular history any with my various, peculiar and unique
idiosyncrasies, is suspended, but
"'I,' the experiencing
subject who considers the world and my own person as phenomenon, 'I' am in
experience and only in it, am just as indubitable and impossible to cancel as
experience itself."
Description of Empathy in Comparison with Other Acts
"A friend tells me that
he has lost his brother and I become aware of his pain."
"What kind of awareness
is this?"
Outer Perception?
"I have no outer
perception of the pain."
Objects of outer perception
are spatio-temporal beings concretely embodied.
Objects of outer perception
come to me with "embodied givenness."
Embodied Givenness
Having "embodied givenness" means having "the quality of being
there itself right now."
The facing side of this cup
has embodied givenness.
The facing side of this cup
is "primordially there."
The non-facing side of this
cup is not.
The non-facing side of this
cup is "co-perceived."
The non-facing side of this
cup is "averted."
Pain
Pain is not like a cup.
Pain does not have a
primordial side that can have embodied givenness.
While the cup has
non-primordially side that are averted, the non-primordially given sides can be
primordially given.
A Limited Parallel Between Outer Perception &
Empathy
But just as we can gain
clarity about the cup by turning it about.
We can gain some clarity
about the pain by investigating it.
But, "in principle, I
can never get an 'orientation' where the pain itself is primordially
given."
Empathy & Primordiality
While objects of both outer
perception and empathy have objects "present here and now."
Empathy lacks the primordiality possible in outer perception.
Primordiality "Within"
But pain can be experienced
primordially, if it is our own.
"[O]ur
own experiences as they are given in reflection have the character of primordiality."
But not all of our pain is experience
primordially.
Remembered pain is not primordially present.
"It is possible for
every experience to be primordially given, i.e., it is possible for the
reflecting glance of the 'I' in the experience to be there bodily itself. Furthermore, it is possible for our own
experiences to be given non-primordially in memory, expectation, or fantasy."
3) Quiz
Name:
Date:
Question: When someone says "empathy"
what do you usually think they mean?
4) Group Exercise
Each group summarizes one of
the significant parts from the following excerpts, and then provides an
explanation to help someone understand the excerptŠand an example if you have
time.
a) "It is possible for
every experience to be primordially given, i.e., it is possible for the
reflecting glance of the 'I' in the experience to be there bodily itself. Furthermore, it is possible for our own
experiences to be given non-primordially in memory, expectation, or
fantasy."
b) "Experiences of early
childhood can also endure into my present, even though pushed into the
background by the profusion of later events. This can clearly be seen in dispositions
towards other persons." "I do not 'forget' my friends when I am not
thinking about them. They then
belong to the unnoticed present horizon of my world."
c) "Part of the nature
of consciousness is that the cogito, the act in which the 'I' lives, is
surrounded by a marginal zone of background experiences in each moment of
existence."
d) "[I]f there were no
possibility of empathy, of transferring the self into the other's orientation,
their statements about their phenomenal world would always have to remain
unintelligible, at least in the sense of a complete fulfilling understanding in
contrast with the mere empty understanding of words."
e) "And, in principle,
it is possible for all the interpretations of myself with which I become
acquainted to be wrong." "It
is possible for another to 'judge me more accurately' than I judge myself and
give me clarity about myself."
f) "Future events which
'throw their shadows in advance' are no different. Scheler gives
an example of James who, under the influence of an unpleasant logic course he
had to teach afternoons, undertook many unnecessary activities the entire day
before simply so that he would find no time for the burdensome
preparation. Yet he did not 'think
about it.' ... Rather, it remains
'in the background' and influences our entire conduct."
Lecture Notes for Week Eleven
To Do:
0) Reading Schedule Change
1) Second Essay Return
2) Third Essay Discussion
3) Group Exercise
Second Essay Returned/Being
Returned
Third Essay Due Thursday, November 10th Sunday, November
13th by 11:59PM
In six pages (that is, in no fewer than six pages,
and no more than six and a half pages), using what we've learned from the first, second, and seventh
chapters of The Sequence for Academic
Reading:
1) explain Alexander's presentation of the
difference between implicit and explicit race bias (from the first and second
page of the assigned excerpt from week eight) and how that difference can play
a role in her broader argument as she expresses it in the assigned parts of her
New Jim Crow, Chapter Five;
2) explain Brentano's claims about the type of
knowledge we can have of ourselves and have of others, as he presents it in the
assigned parts of his Psychology from an
Empirical Standpoint;
3) explain the relevance and implications of
evidence about a) the existence or non-existence of implicit bias, b) the types
of awareness we can or cannot have of ourselves, or c) the type of awareness that we can or cannot have of
others that you have discovered in a
peer-reviewed article;
4) argue for the importance of your research for
Alexander or Brentano (for instance, if your research is skeptical about the
existence of implicit biases, then you could support Brentano's approach, or if
your research affirms the existence of implicit biases, then you could argue
that Brentano's approachŠso far as you know itŠis too limited); and
5) defend either your thesis or your argument in
support of your thesis against someone who could disagree with it.
Group
Exercise
Group
Work Summary: In groups discuss your individual essay's argument, and then work
on coming up with an objection to either your thesis or your support for your
thesis.
Step
0 (in one minute): Identify yourself as being in position 1, 2, or 3.
Position
1: I have a well-developed argument, and I stand in need of a colleague who has
one too, so that we may engage in objection-finding activities together. At
the appropriate time, find two like you.
Position
2: I think I know what I'mma gonna
argue. At the appropriate time, find three you.
Position
3: I do not have an argumentŠperiod. At the appropriate time, find four
like you.
Step
1 (ten minutes): Individually, write out your argument on a piece of
paper. As best you can, distinguish your conclusion from your premise(s). If you donÕt have an argument, invent
one.
Step
2 (ten minutes): In groups (corresponding to your position), discuss your
individual arguments, in turn.
Step
3 (ten minutes): In groups, offer your colleagues, in turn, possible objections
to either their theses or their support for their theses.
Step
4 (ten to twenty minutes): In your original (pre-group) seats, we
collectively discuss the fruits of our labor. Did you change your
position?
Lecture Notes for Week Ten
Research and Naysayer Avenues
Farhad Manjoo's
September 14th 2014 "Exposing Hidden Bias at
Google"
from The New York Times is a nice introduction to Google's issues with
bias.
Richard Felonis'
February 11th 2016 "Here's the Presentation
Google Gives Employees on How to Spot Unconscious Bias at Work" from Business Insider
includes a link to Google's own research on
the subject.
John Hayward's October 8th 2016
"Implicit Bias: The New
'Original Sin'"
from Breitbart represents a naysayer.
"In his
vice-presidential debate, Governor Mike Pence took a swing at one of the LeftÕs
most cherished beliefs: 'implicit bias.
The police officers who support Donald Trump, he said, 'hear the bad
mouthing, the bad mouthing that comes from people that seize upon tragedy in
the wake of police action shootings as a reason to use a broad brush to accuse
law enforcement of implicit bias or institutional racism.' Hillary Clinton sees
'implicit bias' not just in the police force, but in
'everyone in the United States,' Pence declared."
"Liberals cannot brook
criticism of their precious 'implicit bias' theory,
which is a new rationalization for totalitarian power, for rule by the
progressive Elect whose Ivy League training has equipped them to sniff out the
witch of hidden racism."
"Part of the problem
with this 'implicit bias' theory is that itÕs so
unwilling to come to terms with the idea that everyone makes judgments. In
fact, thatÕs the essence of being humanŠthe ability to understand data, share
experiences, calculate probability and respond rationally to best protect
themselves and their loved ones."
"Whether trying to avoid
crime, to enjoy romance or to profit from gambling, to succeed in work or to
avoid car-crashes, humans must make quick judgements based on limited
information, and they do it by learning from books and experience. They canÕt
approach each new problem as if they are a blank-sheet baby free off any bias
or preferencesŠor else theyÕll be mugged, dumped, broke, unemployed and
car-less in very short order."
"WeÕll doubtless be
arguing about police bias and profiling for many years to come, but on this
topic, the hard truth is that some portion of that 'implicit bias' is logical. The Left is driving our society insane by
forcing it to ignore blatant realities of urban crime known by every rookie
cop."
Linked from that Hayward
article is Steve Sailer's October 17th 2016 "Gladwellian Implicit Association Testing
is Just Another Example of Psychology's Replication Crisis" from The Unz Review. It
includes a skeptical review of some of the cognitive research studies that
claim to show implicit bias: "Over the last decade, the Establishment has
celebrated the Implicit Association Test as a way to scientifically uncover
those who are hiding Implicit Bias so they can be put through the re-education
process. But does it really work?"
This article discusses and links to Carlsson
and Agerstrm's April 24th 2016 "A Closer Look at the
Discrimination Outcomes in the IAT Literature" from the Scandinavian Journal of
Psychology, and to Blanton, Jaccard, Strauts, and Tetlock's January
2015 "Toward a Meaningful Metric of Implicit Prejudice" from the
Journal of Applied Psychology.
Lecture Notes for Week Nine
To Do:
1) Third Essay Prompt
2) Library Visits and
Peer-Reviewed Articles
3) Brentano's Consciousness
4) Group Exercise
1) Third Essay Prompt:
http://www.christopherlay.com/criticalcompositionthirdessayprompt.html
2) Library Visits and
Peer-Reviewed Articles
a) "Conscious Efforts to
End Unconscious Bias: Why Women Leave Academic Research"
b) "Black and Blue:
Exploring Racial Bias and Law Enforcement in the Killings of Unarmed Black Male
Civilians"
3) Brentano's Consciousness
Brentano's distinctions:
Phenomena causes of
phenomena.
Mental phenomena are
characterized by intentionality.
Physical phenomena lack that
characteristic.
All mental phenomena are
"perceived in inner consciousness."
Physical phenomena are only
the objects of "external perception."
We can ask "whether
there are any mental phenomena which are not objects of consciousness. All mental phenomena are states of
consciousness; but are all mental phenomena conscious, or might there also be unconscious
mental acts?"
Could it be that some
unconscious mental phenomena cause us to have some experiences?
Could it be that some
unconscious mental phenomena are caused by our experiences?
Could it be that if we appeal
to unconscious mental phenomena as necessary for conscious mental phenomena we
end up with "infinite complexity of
mental states"?
Brentano's Problem:
mental Phenomena are a) intentional (directed, or about something), and mental
phenomena are b) the objects of inner perception.
Is inner perception1
a mental phenomenon? Yes.
If inner perception1
is a mental phenomenon, then it is the object of inner perception2.
If inner perception2
is a mental phenomenon, then it is the object of inner perception3.
If inner perception3
is a mental phenomenon, then it is the object of inner perception4.
If inner perception4
is a mental phenomenon, then it is the object of inner perception5.
If inner perception5
is a mental phenomenon, then it is the object of inner perception6.
If inner perception6
is a mental phenomenon, then it is the object of inner perception7.
This would mean that we
would have an infinite regress of
inner perceptions necessary to account for the inner perception of one single
mental phenomenon.
The path Brentano admits
could exist, but the path he does not want us to go down: Brentano admits that
you could solve this problem by saying that there is awareness of the
directedness of a mental phenomenon because it is the object of a distinct
inner perception, but that you are not aware of the inner perception because
inner perception itself is not normally the object of some other inner
perception.
Brentano's Preferred
Answer: The directedness of mental phenomena includes self-directedness, and
this self-directedness does not result from some distinct, separate mental
phenomenon.
If the inner perception
is the result of a distinct, directed mental phenomenon then you have two
choices: an infinite regress, or two distinct mental phenomena with only one of
them being conscious. But Brentano
argues that inner perception is not
the result of a distinct directed mental phenomenonŠit is the result of one
mental phenomenon with self-direction.
4) Group Exercise
Each group summarizes one of
the significant parts from the following excerpts, and then provides an
explanation to help someone understand the excerptŠand an example if you have
time.
a) "If the attempt to
observe the anger which stirs us becomes impossible because the phenomenon
disappears, it is clear that an earlier state of excitement can no longer be
interfered with in this way. And we really can focus our attention on a past
mental phenomenon just as we can upon a present physical phenomenon, and in
this way we can, so to speak, observe it. Furthermore, we could say that it is
even possible to undertake experimentation on our own mental phenomena in this
manner. For we can, by various means, arouse certain mental phenomena in
ourselves intentionally, in order to find out whether this or that other
phenomenon occurs as a result. We can then contemplate the result of the experiment
calmly and attentively in our memory."
b) "To be sure, this
procedure, which we could call observation in memory, is obviously not fully
equivalent to genuine observation of present events. As everyone knows, memory
is, to a great extent, subject to illusion, while inner perception is
infallible and does not admit of doubt. When the phenomena which are retained
by the memory are substituted for those of inner perception, they introduce
uncertainty and the possibility of many sorts of self- deception into this area
at the same time. And once the possibility of deception exists, its actual
occurrence is not far off, for that unbiased frame of mind which the observer
must have is hardest to achieve in connection with oneÕs own mental acts."
c) "In addition to the
direct perception of our own mental phenomena we have an indirect knowledge of
the mental phenomena of others. The phenomena of inner life usually express
themselves, so to speak, i.e. they cause externally perceivable changes. They are expressed most fully when a
person describes them directly in words. Of course such a description would be
incomprehensible or rather impossible if the difference between the mental
lives of two individuals was such that they did not contain any com- mon
element. In that case their exchange of ideas would be like that between a
person who was born blind and another who was born without the sense of smell
trying to explain to one another the color and the scent of a violet. But this
is not the case."
d) "Less perfectly,
perhaps, but often in a sufficiently clear way, mental states can be manifested
even without verbal communication.
In this category belong, above all, human behavior and voluntary action.
The conclusions that we can draw from them concerning the inner states from
which they derive are often much more certain than those based on verbal
statements ... .
Besides these voluntary ones, there are also involuntary physical
changes which naturally accompany or follow certain mental states. Fright makes
us turn pale, fear induces trembling, our cheeks blush red with shame."
e) "Every mental
phenomenon is characterized by what the Scholastics of the Middle Ages called
the intentional (or mental) inexistence of an object,
and what we might call, though not wholly unambiguously, reference to a
content, direction toward an object9 (which is not to be understood here as
meaning a thing),10 or immanent objectivity. Every mental phenomenon includes
something as object within itself, although they do not all do so in the same
way. In presentation something is presented, in judgement something is affirmed
or denied, in love loved, in hate hated, in desire desired and so on. ...
. We can, therefore, define mental
phenomena by saying that they are those phenomena which contain an object
intentionally within themselves."
f) "Another
characteristic which all mental phenomena have in common is the fact that they
are only perceived in inner consciousness, while in the case of physical
phenomena only external perception is possible. ... . [W]hen we say
that mental phenomena are those which are apprehended by means of inner
perception, we say that their perception is immediately evident."
Lecture Notes for Week Eight
Note: Library visits.
"Chapter 7" "Locating, Mining, and Citing
Sources"
Behrens, Laurence and Leonard
J. Rosen. A Sequence for Academic Writing. 5th Ed.
The Research Question
Your research question should
fulfill the relevant requirements and should be of interest to you.
The Research Answer
When you arrive at an answer
to your research question, you have the thesis to your research paper.
Healthy, Initial Navet
"By working with a
research question (as opposed to a thesis) early in the research process, you
acknowledge that you still have ideas and information to discover before
reaching your conclusions and beginning to write."
Searching
1) "Focus on a
noun"
2) Narrow with another noun,
or modifier
3) Substitute words
4) "Use 'advanced' features
to refine your research"
"As a [general] rule [of
thumb], use several search services ... in any given search to ensure that
you don't miss important sites and sources of information."
"Because each service
uses a different method to catalog Web sites, each service will return a
different results list for searches on the same term."
Alexander's The
New Jim Crow
" A survey was
conducted in 1995 asking the following question: "Would you close your
eyes for a second, envision a drug user, and describe that person to me?"
The startling results were published in the Journal of Alcohol and Drug
Education. Ninety-five percent of respondents pictured a black drug user, while
only 5 percent imagined other racial groups.39 These results contrast sharply
with the reality of drug crime in America. African Americans constituted only
15 percent of current drug users in 1995, and they constitute roughly the same
percentage today. Whites constituted the vast majority of drug users then (and
now), but almost no one pictured a white person when asked to imagine what a
drug user looks like. The same group of respondents also perceived the typical
drug trafficker as black."
"Decades
of cognitive bias research demonstrates that both unconscious and conscious
biases lead to discriminatory actions, even when an individual does not want to
discriminate.41 The quotation commonly attributed to Nietzsche, that
"there is no immaculate perception," perfectly captures how cognitive
schemasŃthought structuresŃinfluence what we notice and how the things we
notice get interpreted.42 Studies have shown that racial schemas operate not
only as part of conscious, rational deliberations, but also
automaticallyŃwithout conscious awareness or intent.43 One study, for example,
involved a video game that placed photographs of white and black individuals
holding either a gun or other object (such as a wallet, soda can, or cell
phone) into various photographic backgrounds. Participants were told to decide
as quickly as possible whether to shoot the target. Consistent with earlier
studies, participants were more likely to mistake a black target as armed when
he was not, and mistake a white target as unarmed, when in fact he was armed.44
This pattern of discrimination reflected automatic, unconscious thought
processes, not careful deliberations."
"Most striking, perhaps,
is the overwhelming evidence that implicit bias measures are disassociated from
explicit bias measures.45 In other words, the fact that you may honestly
believe that you are not biased against African Americans, and that you may
even have black friends or relatives, does not mean that you are free from
unconscious bias. Implicit bias tests may still show that you hold negative
attitudes and stereotypes about blacks, even though you do not believe you do
and do not want to.46"
Banaji Interview Transcript
MAHZARIN BANAJI: So just to
go back a little bit to the beginning, in the late 1990s, I did a very simple
experiment with Tony Greenwald in which I was to quickly associate dark-skinned
faces - faces of black Americans - with negative words. I had to use a computer
key whenever I saw a black face or a negative word, like devil or bomb, war,
things like that.
MAHZARIN BANAJI: And
likewise, there was another key on the keyboard that I had to strike whenever I
saw a white face or a good word, a word like love, peace, joy. I was able to do
this very easily. But when the test then switched the pairing and I had to use
the same computer key to identify a black face with good things and white faces
and bad things, my fingers appeared to be frozen on the keyboard.
MAHZARIN BANAJI: I literally could not find the right - the right key. That
experience is a humbling one. It is even a humiliating one because you come
face to face with the fact that you are not the person you thought you were.
Brentano's Psychology
from an Empirical Standpoint
Book I, Chapter Two, ¤1
Observational Awareness
Incidental Awareness
Book I, Chapter Two, ¤2
Book I, Chapter Two, ¤3
Observational Awareness in
Memory / Temporal Mediation
Book I, Chapter Two, ¤4
Verification and Analogy
Book I, Chapter Two, ¤5
Book I, Chapter Two, last
paragraph:
"What we have said is
sufficient to show from which areas the psychologist gains the experiences upon
which he bases his investigation of mental laws. We found inner perception to
be his primary source, but it has the disadvantage that it can never become
observation. To inner perception we added the contemplation of our previous
mental experiences in memory, and in this case it is possible to focus
attention on them and, so to speak, observe them. The field of experience which
up to this point is limited to our own mental phenomena was then extended, in
that expressions of the mental life of other persons allow us to gain some knowledge
of mental phenomena which we do not experience directly. Certainly the facts
which are important for psychology are thus increased a thousand-fold. This
last type of experience, however, presupposes observation through memory, just
as the latter presupposes the inner perception of present mental phenomena.
Inner perception, therefore, constitutes the ultimate and indispensable
precondition of the other two sources of knowledge. Consequently, and on this
point traditional psychology is correct as against Comte, inner perception
constitutes the very foundation upon which the science of psychology is
erected."
Lecture
Notes for Week Seven
To Do:
1) Second Essay Prompt
2) Writing Tips and Generic
Margin Comments
3) Bill Nye on PhilosophyŠand
specifically Descartes ("Transcript" only)
4) Descartes' Fourth
Meditation
5) Group Exercise
1) Second Essay Prompt http://www.christopherlay.com/criticalcompositionsecondessayprompt.html
In
five pages (that is, in no fewer than five pages, and no more than five and a
half pages), using what we've learned from the first and second chapters of The
Sequence for Academic Reading, and drawing on your own college experiences:
a) explain
Descartes's Method of Doubt and his immediate goal in employing it;
b)
summarize Nye's "beef" with philosophy (from the transcript found
here: http://bigthink.com/videos/bill-nye-on-philosophy), then explain
how Nye's challenge could be applied to Descartes's Method of Doubt;
c)
explain how Descartes could reply to the Nye challenge from 2), above;
d)
argue in favor of either Descartes or Nye as you have presented them above; and
e) consider how a naysayer could reply to your argument from
4), above.
2) Writing Tips and Generic
Margin Comments http://www.christopherlay.com/EssayWritingTips.htm / http://www.christopherlay.com/GenericMarginComments.htm
No Objection Introduced: Will
you consider an objection, as the prompt requires? If so it is good to introduce your
reader to what that objection is, and how you might reply to itŠhowever
briefly.
Objection Without Argument:
Your objection deserves an argument.
As I have advised in class, consider putting the objection to your
argument in its own paragraph so that you make sure it is fully argued
for. Then have your reply in its
own paragraph so that you are more likely to have a fully developed response.
Too Many Objections: When you
present your reader with a possible objection you want the objection to sound
persuasive, and the best way to make it sound persuasive is to provide an
argument for why it is a good objection.
As I have advised in class, consider putting the objection to your
argument in its own paragraph so that you make sure it is fully argued
for. Then have your reply in its
own paragraph so that you are more likely to have a fully developed response.
This means that you don't really have room to consider more than one
objection. Instead of two or more objections
half argued for, you should have one objection fully argued for.
3) Bill Nye on PhilosophyŠand
specifically Descartes ("Transcript" only) http://bigthink.com/videos/bill-nye-on-philosophy
"And to make a philosophical
argument that they may not be real because you canÕt prove Ń like, for example,
you canÕt prove that the sun will come up tomorrow. Not really, right. You
canÕt prove it until it happens. But IÕm pretty confident it will happen.
ThatÕs part of my reality. The sun will come up tomorrow. And so philosophy is
important for a while, but itÕs also Ń I get were Neil and Richard might be
coming from, where you start arguing in a circle where I think therefore I am. ... . And ... this gets into the old thing if you drop a
hammer on your foot, is it real or is it just your imagination? You can run
that test, you know, a couple of times and I hope you come to agree that itÕs
probably real."
4) Fourth Mediation "Of Truth
and Error"
Recall:
Meditation One: The Method of
Doubt leads us to see that all the objects of our thought amount to mere
dubitable knowledge regarding their actual causes (thanks to the possibility of
an evil genie).
Meditation Two: Doubting that
one doubts proves the absolutely certain existence of
thinking. Clarity and distinctness
goes with thinking, not bodies (thanks to the wax example).
Meditation Three: The idea of
God's existence (which has objective reality) entails God's actual existence
external to Descartes (which has formal reality), thanks to an argument from
elimination. Since God exists
external to Descartes, we can conclude that God would not allow the existence of
an evil genie.
So God exists, but so do some
deceptions.
God the Deceiver?
The idea of god does not
include imperfection.
A deception is an
imperfection.
The idea of god does not
include deception.
God Given Faculties
The faculty of judging is god
given.
Would god give me a defective
faculty of judging?
God would not give a faculty
that, when properly employed, would always lead to error.
Whence Error?
I do suffer from bad
judgements.
Is god to blame for such bad
judgments?
That would make god a
deceiver, but deception is not in the idea of god.
Error Shouldn't Surprise Us
Humans seem to be in the
middle of a spectrum of perfection, god being at one end, and nothingness being
at the other end.
So we have perfection or
total being on the one hand, and nothingness or total non-being on other
hand.
Since I participate in
nothingness, non-beingŠthat is, in non-perfectionŠit should not surprise me
that I sometimes "fall into error."
Finite
My not being infinite in
nature has something to do with my capacity for error.
"[M]y being deceived
arises from the circumstance that the power which God has given me of
discerning truth from error is not infinite."
Willing & Understanding
God implants in us the
faculties of understanding and willing.
Error from Mismatching Willing & Understanding
When in error, I am in want
of knowledge that I do not have.
Errors come from a mixture of
the activities of understanding and the will.
Understanding
Understanding merely
entertains ideas.
Alone, understanding is not
the source of error.
Willing
In willing "we are able
to do or not to do the same thing."
When taken in hand with
understanding, willing entails affirming or denying what is proposed by
understanding.
Matching and Mismatching
The faculties of
understanding and willing in themselves are good.
Our application of those
faculties, however, is not god's doing, but our own.
Errors occur when we apply
the faculty of willing beyond the faculty of understanding.
"Whence, then, spring my
errors? They arise from this cause alone, that I do not restrain the will,
which is of much wider range than the understanding, within the same limits,
but extend it even to things I do not understand, and as the will is of itself
indifferent to such, it readily falls into error and sin by choosing the false
in room of the true, and evil instead of good."
Epistemological Maxim
"[T]he
knowledge of the understanding ought always to precede the determination of the
will."
The source of error is human, not divine.
"[I]n truth it is no
imperfection in Deity that he has accorded to me the power of giving or
withholding my assent from certain things of which he has not put a clear and
distinct knowledge in my understanding; but it is doubtless an imperfection in
me that I do not use my freedom aright, and readily give my judgment on matters
which I only obscurely and confusedly conceive."
On the Understanding of that which is Clearly &
Distinctly Understood
"as often as I so
restrain my will within the limits of my knowledge, that it forms no judgment
except regarding objects which are clearly and distinctly represented to it by
the understanding, I can never be deceived; because every clear and distinct
conception is doubtless something, and as such cannot owe its origin to
nothing, but must of necessity have God for its authorŠGod, I say, who, as
supremely perfect, cannot, without a contradiction, be the cause of any error;
and consequently it is necessary to conclude that every such conception [or
judgment] is true."
Group Work Summary: In groups
of three, discuss your second essay's argument and then work on coming up with
an objection (or naysayer) to either your thesis or your support for your
thesis.
Step 1 (ten minutes):
Individually, write out your argument on a piece of paper, clearly distinguishing
your conclusion from your premise(s).
Step 2 (ten minutes): In groups, discuss your individual
arguments, in turn.
Step 3 (ten minutes): In
groups, offer your colleagues, in turn, possible objections to either their
theses or their support for their theses.
Step 4 (ten minutes): In your original (pre-group) seats, we
collectively discuss the fruits of our labor.
Lecture Notes for Week Six
To Do:
1) Second Essay Prompt
2) Writing Tips and Generic
Margin Comments
3) Bill Nye on PhilosophyŠand
specifically Descartes ("Transcript" only)
4) Descartes' Third
Meditation (metaphysics of ideas, causes, and god)
5) Interlude: Group
Explanations utilizing "The Structure"
6) Argument from Elimination (false
trilemma)
7) Naysayers (objection and
reply)
1) Second Essay Prompt http://www.christopherlay.com/criticalcompositionsecondessayprompt.html
2) Writing Tips and Generic
Margin Comments http://www.christopherlay.com/EssayWritingTips.htm / http://www.christopherlay.com/GenericMarginComments.htm
3) Bill Nye on PhilosophyŠand
specifically Descartes ("Transcript" only) http://bigthink.com/videos/bill-nye-on-philosophy
4) Descartes' Third Meditation:
"Of God: That he Exists"
Recall all we have so far:
Method of Doubt
If something has deceived in
the past, it cannot be trusted to provide infallible certitude.
Cogito
"I am a thinking
(conscious) thing" is known with infallible certitude.
Clearly & Distinctly
And we have established that
whatever is understood clearly and distinctly is understood to be true
"I may now take a
general rule, that all that is very clearly and distinctly apprehended
(conceived) is true"
Seemingly Clear &
Distinct
But what about those
seemingly clear and distinct mathematical ideas we have?
Oh yes, they could be (it is
possible) implanted in us by an evil genie
But isn't it a "manifest
contradiction" that 2 + 3 should = 4 or 6?
God a Deceiver?
Would god allow an evil
genie?
God's Role
So we need to see if there is
a god, and if there is, would she permit
wholesale deception.
Division of Thoughts
Let's divide our thoughts to
discern which are susceptible of truth, and which of error
Consider judgements:
In judgements we can wonder
"the ideas which are in us are like or conformed to the things that are
external to us."
In some cases, we have found
differences.
This leads us to wonder where
our ideas come from.
Can we match our ideas of a
cup with cup "out there in the real world," itself?
Ideas can appear to be
a) innate (placed within, usually from the beginning),
b) adventitious (happening by chance from something other than
ourselves), and
c) invented (by us).
The Idea of God
Descartes idea of god: "eternal, infinite, [immutable],
all-knowing, all-powerful, and the creator of all things that are out of
himself ... ."
The Cause of the Idea of God
But what could cause me to
have an idea of the infinite?
"Now, it is manifest by
the natural light that there must at least be as much reality in the efficient
and total cause as in its effect ... ."
Causes & Realities
The idea of the infinite in
god is caused by something.
The idea of the infinite in
god, the effect, must draw its reality from the cause of that idea.
The effect cannot have more
reality in it than the cause.
Ideas have objective reality.
Causes have formal reality.
The Ideas & Realities of God
The formal reality corresponding
to the idea of the infinite in god causes the objective reality of the idea of
the infinite in god.
"But in order that an
idea may contain this objective reality rather than that, it must doubtless
derive it from some cause in which is found at least as much formal reality as
the idea contains of objective;"
The idea of the infinite in
god could rest on some other idea, but not infinitely.
There must be some source to
this idea of the infinite in god.
5) Interlude: Group
Explanations utilizing "The Structure"
Recall that "The Structure" is a template
paragraph structure for explaining things like difficult quotes.
Introduce your reader to the task of the paragraph.
Paraphrase the quote.
Definition of relevant term(s) from that quote.
What that quote means (obviously).
Why it obviously means that.
What the quote doesn't mean X (where x is something
semi-obvious).
Why the quote doesn't mean X.
What else the quote doesn't mean, say Y (where y is something
less obvious)
Why the quote doesn't mean Y.
What your reader should think as a result of having read the structure
of the quote
Let's do another experiment in attaining 1) the
mythical ideal of college education (where you are confronted by different
perspectives had by your peers and thus foreshadow your experiences in a
deliberative democracy), and 2) a marketable skill.
In seven different groups, explain
the following seven different quotes utilizing the so-called Structure.
a) (from Meditation Three) Descartes is not Alone
"if the objective
reality [or perfection] of any one of my ideas be such as clearly to convince
me, that this same reality exists in me neither formally nor eminently, and if,
as follows from this, I myself cannot be the cause of it, it is a necessary
consequence that I am not alone in the world, but that there is besides myself some other being who exists as the cause of
that idea;"
b) (from Meditation Three) God Exists
"There only remains,
therefore, the idea of God, in which I must consider whether there is anything
that cannot be supposed to originate with myself. By the name God, I understand
a substance infinite, [eternal, immutable], independent, all-knowing,
all-powerful, and by which I myself, and every other thing that exists, if any
such there be, were created. But these properties are so great and excellent,
that the more attentively I consider them the less I feel persuaded that the
idea I have of them owes its origin to myself alone And
thus it is absolutely necessary to conclude, from all that I have before said,
that God exists."
c) (from Meditation Three) Descartes is Finite
"For though the idea of
substance be in my mind owing to this, that I myself am a substance, I should
not, however, have the idea of an infinite substance, seeing I am a finite
being, unless it were given me by some substance in reality infinite."
d) (from Meditation Three) From Self-Knowledge
"All that is here
required, therefore, is that I interrogate myself to discover whether I possess
any power by means of which I can bring it about that I, who now am, shall
exist a moment afterward: for, since I am merely a thinking thing (or since, at
least, the precise question, in the meantime, is only of that part of myself),
if such a power resided in me, I should, without doubt, be conscious of it; but
I am conscious of no such power, and thereby I manifestly know that I am
dependent upon some being different from myself."
e) (from Meditation Three) Deception's Source
"And the whole force of
the argument of which I have here availed myself to establish the existence of
God, consists in this, that I perceive I could not possibly be of such a nature
as I am, and yet have in my mind the idea of a God, if God did not in reality
existŠthis same God, I say, whose idea is in my mindŠthat is, a being who
possesses all those lofty perfections, of which the mind may have some slight
conception, without, however, being able fully to comprehend them, and who is
wholly superior to all defect [and has nothing that marks imperfection]: whence
it is sufficiently manifest that he cannot be a deceiver, since it is a dictate
of the natural light that all fraud and deception spring from some
defect."
f) (from Meditation Two) If Deceived, then Existing
"But there is I know
not what being, who is possessed at once of the highest power and the deepest
cunning, who is constantly employing all his ingenuity in deceiving me.
Doubtless, then, I exist, since I am deceived; and, let him deceive me as he
may, he can never bring it about that I am nothing, so long as I shall be
conscious that I am something. So that it must, in fine, be maintained, all
things being maturely and carefully considered, that this proposition (pronunciatum )
I am, I exist, is necessarily true each time it is expressed by me, or
conceived in my mind."
g) (from Meditation One) Evil Genie
"I will suppose,
then, not that Deity, who is sovereignly good and the fountain of truth, but
that some malignant demon, who is at once exceedingly potent and deceitful, has
employed all his artifice to deceive me; I will suppose that the sky, the air,
the earth, colors, figures, sounds, and all external things, are nothing better
than the illusions of dreams, by means of which this being has laid snares for
my credulity; I will consider myself as without hands, eyes, flesh, blood, or
any of the senses, and as falsely believing that I am possessed of these;"
Steps to Achieve Group
Success
1) Get into your groups (per
in-class instructions) ASAP
2) Get to know your fellow
group members (in less than two minutes)
3) Listen to your designated
reader read the quote to be explained.
4) Pick the part of the quote
that you want to explain, if the entire quote is too much.
4) Explain the quote or part
of the quote in terms of the structure.
5) Designate a presenter and
a question-caller-uponer.
6) Present your findings to
the class.
6) Argument from Elimination
(false trilemma)
(from Meditation Three) Whence the Idea of God
But has Descartes
nevertheless somehow produced this idea of god in himself, or is the idea
innate?
The idea is not "drawn
from the senses."
The idea is not
"presented to [him] unexpectedly."
The idea is "not even a
pure production or fiction of my mind, for it is not in [his] power to take
from or add to it."
The idea is, from
elimination, innate.
7) Naysayers (objection and
reply)
Lecture Notes for Week Five
In the same groups from last week, answer the
following questions (on a piece of paper with today's date and all of your
group members' names on it):
1) how did the deception happen?
2) when the deception occurred, did the subject
know it was a deception?
3) how did the subject discover that the deception
was a deception?
4) how does the subject now handle similar
instances?
Recap of Descartes' First
Meditation
"Chapter 2" "Critique" Behrens, Laurence and
Leonard J. Rosen. A Sequence for Academic Writing. 5th
Ed.
"Evaluating
Persuasive Writing"
"You can assess the validity of an argument
and its conclusion by determining whether the author has (1) clearly defined
key terms, (2) used information fairly, and (3) argued logically and not
fallaciously."
"Avoiding
Logical Fallacies"
Loaded terms
Against the person
Causation correlation
False dichotomies
Hasty generalizations
False analogy
Begging the question
Non Sequitur
Oversimplification
Q2 "(2) To what extent do
you agree with the author?"
Agreeing, disagreeing, or both, to some extent or
another
Either Way Begin
with a summarization.
Express your position.
Explain why you have that position.
Argue for why having the position you have is the correct
way to go.
Support
"Any [position] that you express is effective
to the extent you support it by supplying evidence from your reading (which
should be properly cited), your observation, or your personal
experience."
W/Out
Support
Without that support, you merely have an
opinion.
Reasons
There are a number of reasons for agreeing or
disagreeing.
Assumptions
Good arguments that rest atop bad assumptions
aren't that good.
"How do you determine the validity of
assumptions once you have identified them?
In the absence of more scientific criteria, you start by considering how
well the author's assumptions stack up against your own experience, observations,
reading, and valuesŠwhile remaining honestly aware of the limits of your own
personal knowledge."
Critique
Suppose you've found an underlying assumption that
you object to. How to critique and
argument with a questionable assumption?
A critique is "a systematic
evaluation."
"Is the information accurate?"
"Is the information significant?"
"Has the author defined terms clearly?"
"Has the author used and interpreted
information fairly?"
"Has the author argued logically?"
Descartes' Second Meditation
Thinking exists with absolute
certitude.
Body may or may not exist, it
is not known with absolute certitude.
Clarity and Distinctness as
an epistemological standard.
Certain existence should go with clarity and distinctness.
Wax thought experiment goes
shows that certain existence goes with clarity and distinctness.
Lecture Notes for Week Four
Individually, spend ten minutes writing out how you
have once been deceived by your senses.
In groups, spend ten minutes explaining to your
group members, in turn, how you were once deceived by your senses.
In the same groups, decide which deception will be
your group's exemplar.
In the same groups, answer the following questions
(on a piece of paper with today's date and all of your group members' names on
it):
1) how did the deception happen?
2) when the deception occurred, did the subject
know it was a deception?
3) how did the subject discover that the deception
was a deception?
4) how does the subject now handle similar
instances?
Consider Bill Nye's consideration of Descartes:
http://bigthink.com/videos/bill-nye-on-philosophy
Descartes' Method of Doubt
What is a method? When does one use a method?
What is doubt?
When should one be doubtful?
Second Essay ...
Lecture Notes for Week Three
"Chapter 1" "Summary, Paraphrase, and Quotation"
Behrens, Laurence and Leonard J. Rosen.
A Sequence for Academic
Writing. 5th Ed.
Good Summaries
A)
Objective: do not misrepresent that which is summarized
B)
Purpose: focus on central idea
C)
Brevity: exclude superfluous details
Guidelines "These
pointers are not meant to be ironclad rules; rather, they are designed to
encourage habits of thinking that will allow you to very your technique as the
situation demands."
"Write a thesisŠa one- or two-sentence summary
of the entire passage" Crystalize
the main point of what you are summarizing.
"Write the first draft of your summary"
Add only the details needed to explain/support your
crystallization.
"Check your summary against the original
passage"
Use this too often overlooked step to ensure
objectivity.
"Chapter 6" "Chapter
6: Writing as a Process" Behrens,
Laurence and Leonard J. Rosen. A Sequence for Academic Writing. 5th
Ed.
Writing & Thinking
Sometimes thoughts precede
writing, and sometimes writing produces thoughts.
The same sometimes applies to
asking questions in class: you can raise your hand with a question in mind, but
discover that as you ask your question you actually end up asking a different
question.
So what?
The point is that by writing,
or asking a questions in class, without first having a fully developed thought
can be good as the process of writing and asking questions can help develop
thought.
Stages
"Stages of the Writing
Process"
"Understanding the
task"
"ReadŠor createŠthe
assignment. Understand its purpose,
scope, and audience."
"Gathering data"
"Locate and review
informationŠfrom sources and from your own experienceŠand formulate an
approach.
"Invention"
"Use various techniques
(e.g., listing, outlining, freewriting) to generate promising ideas and a
particular approach to the assignment.
Gather more data if needed.
Aim for a working thesis, a tentative (but well-reasoned and
well-informed) statement of the direction you intend to pursue."
"Drafting"
"Sketch the paper you
intend to compose and then write all sections necessary to support the working
thesis. Stop if necessary to gather
more data. Typically, you will both
follow you plan and revise and invent a new (or slightly new) plan as you
write. Expect to discover key parts
of your paper as you write."
"Revision"
Rewrite in order to make the
draft coherent and unified."
"Revise and the global
level, reshaping your thesis and adding to, rearranging, or deleting paragraphs
in order to support the thesis.
Gather more data as needed to flesh out paragraphs in support of the
thesis."
"Revise at the local
level of paragraphs, ensuring that each is well reasoned and supports the
thesis."
"Editing" "Revise at the sentence
level for style and brevity. Revise
for correctness: grammar, punctuation, usage, and spelling."
That was from the Sequence text. What
follows are some of my thoughts on paraphrasing:
http://christopherlay.com/GenericMarginComments.htm
Introductions:
Other than supplying the reader with the barest
amount of information needed to understand the thesis, and other than supplying
the reader with the thesis, your first, introductory paragraph should also
include what I call a roadmap. A roadmap tells your reader, explicitly,
how you will explain and defend your thesis. It is something you say
after positing your thesis, and before you begin to explain and defend
it. As such, it introduces your reader to how you will support your
thesis. And insofar as you support your thesis by considering and
responding to an objection, it is sometimes (very often in fact) useful to
introduce your reader to the objection you'll consider before concluding.
Plato's Apology
Truth
Socrates, in his defense
against the charges, purports to speak the truth
Old Reputation
Socrates was known (amongst
the Athenians) as one who
1) makes (reckless)
speculations about the heavens and earth,
2) makes "the worse
appear the better cause," and
3) teaches such things to
others
Socrates' Defense
"the simple truth is, O
Athenians, [is] that I have nothing to do with physical speculations"
Socrates' Reputation as a
Sophist
Socrates has an inaccurate
reputation as being a Sophist that he also seeks to disprove
A sophist is one who charges
money to teach people how to make "the worse appear the better cause"
"As little foundation is
there for the report that I am a teacher, and take money; this accusation has
no more truth in it than the other"
Human Instruction
Beyond denying that he is a
sophist, Socrates denies that teaching itself exists
Instructing humans, he says,
would be an honorable thingŠif it was even possible
Wise
Socrates states:
"this reputation of mine
has come of a certain sort of wisdom which I possess"
This is not the
"superhuman wisdom" claimed to be had by the sophists
The God of Delphi
Socrates appeals to a god as
a witness
"None Wiser"
Socrates gives the following
account: "Chaerephon, as you know, was very
impetuous in all his doings, and he went to Delphi and boldly asked ... the
oracle to tell him whether anyone was wiser than I was, and the Pythian
prophetess answered, that there was no man wiser"
Socrates' Response
Yet Socrates knows that he
has "no wisdom, small or great"
Was the god's proclamation a
riddle?
It could not have been a lie
as gods don't do that
Experiment, Tests, and
Socratic Inquiry
To discern the nature of the
god's proclamation, Socrates tested it
"I reflected that if I
could only find a man wiser than myself, then I might go to the god with a
refutation in my hand"
"I should say to him,
'Here is a man who is wiser than I am; but you said that I was the
wisest'"
Hence we have Socrates'
procedure of inquiry, of testing claims
Testing a Politician
E.g.: "When I began to
talk with him, I could not help thinking that he was not really wise, although
he was thought wise by many, and still wiser by himself; and thereupon I tried
to explain to him that he thought himself wise, but was not really wise; and
the consequence was that he hated me, and his enmity was shared by several who
were present and heard me"
Wisdom
As a result of examining the
politician Socrates concludes:
"I am better off than he
is,Šfor he knows nothing, and thinks that he knows; I
neither know nor think that I know. In this latter particular, then, I seem to
have slightly the advantage of him."
This Can't End Well
"the result of my
mission was just this: I found that the men most in repute [those engaged in
political actives, which surely includes members of his audience] were all but
the most foolish; and that others less esteemed were really wiser and
better"
Wisdom vs. Pretense to
Knowledge
Socrates asserts that he'd
gladly not have the knowledge they have if it includes having their ignorance
too
Hence Socrates' Negative
Reputation
Such inquiry proved dangerous
for Socrates, earning him enemies
The Worth of Human Wisdom /
The Oracle Interpreted
Folks call Socrates wise as
they take Socrates to have the wisdom he seeks in others
But, "God only is
wise," Socrates argues
And when the god speaks of
Socrates as wise, he only shows that "the wisdom of men is worth little or
nothing"
When the god speaks of
Socrates as wise, he is only using Socrates as an example of human wisdom, and
how little knowledge that wisdom includes
Here's how Socrates
interprets the god's proclamation: "He, O men, is the wisest, who, like
Socrates, knows that his wisdom is in truth worth nothing"
Socrates' Days
And it is in this way that
Socrates busies himself, leaving him no time for any type of public officeŠor
for earning money
Teaching? The sons of the rich nevertheless
willingly follow Socrates about
They enjoy the way in which
Socrates exposes those who claim to have knowledge
Those sons enjoy the way in
which the examined become angry with Socrates instead of themselves
The anger of the examined
takes the form of the repeating "the ready-made charges which are used
against all philosophers"
And Meletus
represents the anger of the examined with his charges:
Contemporary Charges According to Meletus,
Socrates
1) "is a doer of
evil"
2) "corrupts the
youth"
3) "does not believe in
the gods of the state"
4) "has other new
divinities of his own"
Yet Socrates recognizes that
he will not likely be able to sway the Athenian rabble
He predicts that his
destruction will come from "the envy and detraction of the world"
But if he knows he's to die,
shouldn't he be ashamed at not trying to save himself?
Socrates replies: "a man
who is good for anything ought not to calculate the chance of living or dying;
he ought only to consider whether in doing anything he is doing right or
wrongŠacting the part of a good man or of a bad"
On the Fear of Death
To be afraid of death is to
claim knowledge about it
But about what happens after
death, or even during death, we know nothing
The fear of death is thus a
pretense to wisdom, but not itself wise
Disobedience
While Socrates admits that he
knows very little, he does know that disobedience to the state is evil, but
that disobedience to a god is a greater evil
There is a possible good to
obeying the state, but a certain evil to disobeying a god, and Socrates states
that he "will never fear or avoid a possible good rather than a certain
evil"
The Soul 's Primacy
Socrates considers a scenario
where he is let off on the condition that he cease his enquiries
Socrates says he reports to
gods over men, and that he would/will continue to chastise, via examination,
his fellow Athenians for improperly valuing money, honor, and reputation over
wisdom and truth
Socrates on the Fear of Death
"When I do not know
whether death is a good or an evil, why should I propose a penalty which would
certainly be an evil?"
Why not Exile?
Socrates will not propose
that he is put in exile, as this would mean that he disobeys the god
"if I tell you that to
do as you say would be a disobedience to the God, and therefore that I cannot
hold my tongue, you will not believe that I am serious; and if I say again that
daily to discourse about virtue, and of those other things about which you hear
me examining myself and others, is the greatest good of man, and that the unexamined life is not worth living,
you are still less likely to believe me" (emphasis mine)
Quiz: Why can't Socrates
express a fear of death without sounding like a hypocrite?
Your first essay needs to be argumentative.
Premise Conclusion
Thesis qua conclusion
Disagreements &
Agreements
How to handle
generalizations, exceptions, and counter-examples?
Recall Delbanco:
"It is a pipe dream to imagine that every student can have the sort of
experience that our richest colleges, at their best, still provide. But it is a
nightmare society that affords the chance to learn and grow only to the
wealthy, brilliant, or lucky few. Many remarkable teachers in America's
community colleges, unsung private colleges, and underfinanced public colleges
live this truth every day, working to keep the ideal of liberal education for
all citizens alive."
How can exceptions prove a
rule?
Here are relevant comments to
avoid getting on your first essay (from http://www.christopherlay.com/GenericMarginComments.htm):
I
need to know not just what you'll argue, but also how you'll argue. More
detail in your thesis, however brief, is needed. Sometimes, the shorter
the essay, the more detailed your thesis needs to be. Your thesis
statement needs to include evaluative terms to show that it is the conclusion
to your argument, and a brief explanation as to why you are making that
argument.
In
such a short essay I need to see one sustained argument. Insofar
as you have more than one argument, you've painted yourself into a corner, so
to speak. By presenting so many small arguments, you've taken from
yourself the space you need to support one argument, which is all that a short
essay like this one can do.
Just
agreeing with the author does not count as acceptable evaluation, if it does
not include critical evaluation. Critical evaluation would pose an
objection to the thesis agreed with, and then a possible response to that
objection. Such evaluation doesn't merely repeat what the author
writes.
Your objection deserves an
argument. As I have advised in
class, consider putting the objection to your argument in its own paragraph so
that you make sure it is fully argued for.
Then have your reply in its own paragraph so that you are more likely to
have a fully developed response.
When you present your reader
with a possible objection you want the objection to sound persuasive, and the
best way to make it sound persuasive is to provide an argument for why it is a
good objection. As I have advised
in class, consider putting the objection to your argument in its own paragraph
so that you make sure it is fully argued for. Then have your reply in its own
paragraph so that you are more likely to have a fully developed response. This
means that you don't really have room to consider more than one objection. Instead of two or more objections half
argued for, you should have one objection fully argued for.
Group Work Summary: In groups
of three, discuss your essay's argument and then work on coming up with an
objection to either your thesis or your support for your thesis.
Step 1 (ten minutes):
Individually, write out your argument on a piece of paper. As best you can, distinguish your
conclusion from your premise(s).
Step 2 (ten minutes): In groups, discuss your individual
arguments, in turn.
Step 3 (ten minutes): In
groups, offer your colleagues, in turn, possible objections to either their
theses or their support for their theses.
Step 4 (ten to twenty
minutes): In your original
(pre-group) seats, we collectively discuss the fruits of our labor.
Lecture Notes for Week One & Two
Delbanco presents us with the
difference between the college ideal and the college reality.
For some folks, the college
ideal is a reality.
Delbanco: "For a relatively few, college remains the sort of
place that Kronman, a former dean of Yale Law School,
recalls from his days at Williams College, where his favorite class took place
at the home of a philosophy professor whose two golden retrievers slept on
either side of the fireplace 'like bookends beside the hearth' while the sunset
lit the Berkshire hills 'in scarlet and gold.'"
For some folks, the reality
of their college experience is not the college ideal.
Delbanco: "But for many more students, college means the anxious
pursuit of marketable skills in overcrowded, under-resourced institutions,
where little attention is paid to that elusive entity sometimes called the
'whole person.'"
"For still others, it means traveling by night to a
fluorescent-lit office building or to a classroom that exists only in
cyberspace."
Delbanco argues that the college
ideal should become a reality for more people.
Experiment
In "College at Risk" Andrew Delbanco claims that one of the ideals of college education
is in part achieved when you directly interact with your colleagues.
Delbanco
As he puts it: "A well-managed discussion
among peers of diverse interests and talents can help students learn the
difference between informed insights and mere opinionating."
"It can provide the pleasurable chastisement
of discovering that others see the world differently, and that their experience
is not replicable by, or even reconcilable with, one's own."
"It is a rehearsal for deliberative
democracy."
Let's do an experiment in attaining 1) the mythical
ideal of college education (where you are confronted by different perspectives
had by your peers and thus foreshadow your experiences in a deliberative
democracy), and 2) a marketable skill.
In groups of five, each group
member presents one thing they hope to attain from an ideal college experience,
and one thing from about their current college experience (about the college
itself) that might get in the way of attaining that ideal college
experience. Then the group decides
which (one) of the five things they hope to attain to present to the class, and
which (one) of the five things about the current college experience that might
get in the way of attaining that ideal.
"Chapter 1" "Summary, Paraphrase, and Quotation"
Behrens, Laurence and Leonard J. Rosen.
A Sequence for Academic
Writing. 5th Ed.
Paraphrase
When you paraphrase, you
express someone else's words with your own words.
Not a Summary
Whereas summaries condense
material down, paraphrases do not.
Reasons to Paraphrase
A) Original wording is
"dense, abstract, archaic, or possibly confusing"Što clarify what
might be unclear
B) Help yourself understand
the words you are paraphrasing
C) To "maintain a
consistent tone and level in your essay"
Substitution
Try substituting different
words, making sure that you understand the definitions of the original words
and the words you substitute them with.
Sentence Order
"Sentence structure,
even sentence order, in the paraphrase need not be based on that of the
original."
That was from the Sequence text. What
follows are some of my thoughts on paraphrasing:
http://christopherlay.com/GenericMarginComments.htm
Paraphrasing Over Quotes:
Paraphrasing is, in general, better than quoting. Here is a good, general
guide for when to paraphrase instead of quoting: if you can convey the
same information in your own words without loss of meaning, then a paraphrase
is usually better. Readers of your paper tend to understand you better
than they understand academic articles. When grading your papers, graders
need to see that you understand what it is that you are representing. If
you can properly paraphrase passages, then it shows your grader that you
understand the material better than someone who can only find the correct
passage and quote it. And if a paraphrase won't do, whenever you quote,
you should also explain the quote to the reader, to help them understand it
(and to show your grader that you yourself understand the quote).
Quoting
is usually necessary when:
1) attributing something controversial to the person quoted,
2) you are pointing out something that is too easily overlooked, or
3) your entire thesis depends on particular wording, or
4) there just simply is no
better way of putting it.
Bad
quoting occurs, in my mind, when it seems like:
1) you have nothing to say and so are throwing in quotes,
2) you are using long quotes to fluff up your essay, or
3) you are afraid to commit to a
paraphrase, when a paraphrase would convey the same information.
[Now, "The Structure," a paragraph
structure that you can use to explain a key concept.]
Statement, quote, paraphrase, example, or analogy.
Definition of relevant term(s) from that statement.
What that statement means.
Why is means that.
What the statement doesn't mean X (semi-obviously).
Why the statement doesn't mean X.
What else the statement doesn't mean, say Y (less obviously)
Why the statement doesn't mean Y.
What your reader should think as a result of having read the
paragraph
[Now, if you have space and need, a follow-up paragraph
structure.]
Example of what it means.
Explanation of why that example exemplifies what you say it
exemplifies.
Explain what the example doesn't show.
Explain now how the statement and the example are relevant to
your thesis.
Experiment
Let's do another experiment in attaining 1) the
mythical ideal of college education (where you are confronted by different
perspectives had by your peers and thus foreshadow your experiences in a
deliberative democracy), and 2) a marketable skill.
Each group paraphrases one of the following
sentences, and then provides an explanation to help someone understand the
quoteŠand an example if you have time.
A) "Seen in that long view, the distinctive
contribution of the United States to the history of liberal education has been
to deploy it on behalf of the cardinal American principle that all persons have
the right to pursue happiness, and that 'getting to know,' in Matthew Arnold's
much-quoted phrase, 'the best which has been thought and said in the world' is
helpful to that pursuit."
B) "Knowledge of the
past, in other words, helps citizens develop the capacity to think critically
about the presentŠan indispensable attribute of a healthy democracy."
C) "These ideals and achievements
are among the glories of our civilization, and all Americans should be alarmed
as they come to be regarded as luxuries unaffordable for all but the wealthy
few."
D) "But for many more students,
college means the anxious pursuit of marketable skills in overcrowded, under_resourced institutions, where little attention is
paid to that elusive entity sometimes called the 'whole person.'"
E) "To succeed in
sustaining college as a place where liberal learning still takes place will be
very costly." "But in the
long run, it will be much more costly if we
fail."
F) "What parents want for their
children is not just prosperity but happiness. ... And though it is foolish to
deny the linkage between the two, they are not the same thing."
G) "A class should be small enough
to permit every student to participate in the give-and-take of discussion under
the guidance of an informed, skilled, and engaged teacher."
Quiz #1:
As implied by Delbanco,
what two main goals should a "'whole person'" in college have?