Essential Terminology Flashcards
A posteriori
A Latin term that describes a belief that can only be known via experience of the world: for example, that ‘snow is white’ or that ‘the Atlantic is smaller than the Pacific’. A posteriori beliefs are contrasted with a priori beliefs.
A priori
A Latin term that describes knowledge that is known prior to or independently from experience. For example, that ‘1,000,000+1=1,000,001’ can be known independently of counting a million apples, adding another one, and then recounting them. A priori beliefs are contrasted with a posteriori beliefs, which are ones derived from experience.
Analytic / synthetic
A term that describes the manner in which a proposition is true. An analytic truth is a proposition that is true in virtue of the meanings of the words alone. In other words, an analytic truth is one that is true by definition, for example, ‘A bachelor is an unmarried man’. Analytic truths are contrasted with synthetic truths - truths that cannot be determined simply by analysing the meanings of the terms used. For example, ‘All bachelors have the use of at least one kidney’ is a synthetic truth.
Antecedent / consequent
A hypothetical proposition has the form, if x then y. For example, “If Trump builds a wall, then Mexico will pay for it’. Part x of a hypothetical proposition - “Trump builds a wall’ - is called the antecedent, and party - Mexico will pay for it’ - is called bthe consequent.
Assertion / claim / proposition
A sentence that makes a claim about the way the world actually is; for example, There is a cat on my mat’ or ‘I am thinking about a dragon’. Like a belief, a proposition can be true or false. Other sentences can play different roles, for example, “Sit down NOW’ or ‘What are you looking at? Such sentences (commands, questions, exclamations) do not make specific claims about the way the world is, and hence are not propositions.
Consistent / inconsistent
Two or more beliefs or claims are said to be consistent if they can all be true at the same time (often said to be consistent with each other). If they cannot all be true, then they are inconsistent (with each other). A belief can also be said to be consistent with itself as long as it is possible for it to be true. An inconsistent belief is one that cannot be true because it is self-contradictory. (Consistent’ may also be used in a non-technical sense to indicate ‘harmonious’ or ‘regular’.)
Contingent
A contingent truth is one which happens to be true, but which may not have been. In other words, it is a truth for which it is logically possible that it be false. The opposite of a contingent truth is a necessary one, that is, one which has to be true and could not be otherwise, or for which it is logically impossible that it be false. For example, it is a contingent truth that daffodils are yellow, since it is conceivable that they might have been blue.
Dilemma
In ethics, a moral dilemma is any situation that an agent faces where there is a difficulty choosing between. two or more courses of action. This difficulty arises when there are moral reasons for both choosing and not choosing a course of action. It also arises when there are moral reasons against all courses of action, but where a choice has to be made.
False
A term used of beliefs and propositions. A false belief is one which is not true. One account of what makes a belief or proposition false is that it fails to correspond with the facts. So, for example, the belief that humans are descended from apes will be false if in fact they are descended from dolphins.
Justification
The support or grounds for holding a belief, which gives someone a reason for believing it or makes them justified in believing it. The process of justifying a belief is by offering evidence. The traditional analysis of knowledge sees justification as necessary for knowledge.
Necessary / contingent truths
Necessary’ and ‘contingent’ are opposing terms. In the most restricted sense, a necessary truth is one which has to be true and could not be otherwise. Another way of thinking about a necessary truth is as a truth where the opposite is logically impossible; for example, that a triangle has three sides (a two-sided triangle is logically impossible and cannot be imagined). A contingent truth is one which just happens to be true, and is a truth where the opposite is logically possible, for example, it is true that Theresa May was once the prime minister of the United Kingdom (but it is entirely possible that this may never have happened).
Objective / subjective
Objectivity concerns the way things
really are. Subjectivity is the way they seem to a mind. A judgement or perception may be termed subjective if it is made by a particular mind (i.e. by a subject of experience). This usage often denotes the fact that this judgement or perception need not be accurate because it may not reflect the way things are beyond the mind. But if a judgement or perception is objective, this means that it does reflect the way objects really are independently of the person perceiving or making the judgement. The key problem we grapple with in the section on Perception and the Source of Knowledge can be characterised as the question of how and whether we can move from subjective experience to objective knowledge, or from sense data to knowledge of the external world. And in moral philosophy, one central meta-ethical debate concerns whether moral judgements are objective or subjective; whether they reflect some independent moral reality or whether they are dependent on (or relative to) personal attitudes, feelings or preferences.
Paradox
In philosophical terms, a paradox is a contradictory, or apparently contradictory, statement. For example, “This sentence is false’ is a paradox. At first sight, we seem to have only two options: either the sentence is true or it is false. If it is true, then it appears as if the sentence must be false. But if it is false, then it appears as if the sentence must be true. Paradoxes can emerge because there is a serious issue with the concepts we are talking about, or the logical or linguistic framework that we are using.
Proof / prove
The word ‘proof’ can be used to refer to any argument that establishes the truth of its conclusion. And to prove a conclusion is just to establish its truth by a process of reasoning. More formally, a proof is a sound argument - that is, a deductive argument with true premises. Because its premises are true and its reasoning valid, the conclusion of a sound argument or proof must be true. To prove in this narrower sense is to establish a conclusion by use of such a proof.
Sound argument / proof
A deductive argument with true premises.
