Lecture 3 Predecessors of psychology: 17th/18th century developments - 1600-1700

Question 1

hoe heet de methode van descartes

Answer 1

cartesian doubt

Question 2

wat houdt cartesian doubt in

Answer 2

i doubt is always true!! het enige wat we zeker weten, zegt namelijk niks over wat we denken of wat we observeren.

descartes ging dus gewoon alles wat hij wist af, en het kwam er op neer dat letterlijk NIKS zeker is, je kan voor alles wel een argument van doubt bedenken. het enige wat zeker is is dat we twijfelen (i doubt is always true)

Question 3

i think therefore i am = vertaling…

Answer 3

cogito ergo sum

Question 4

wat was zijn gedachte over mind-body

Answer 4

dualism: The soul will always doubt, but you can imagine the soul without the body! Even if the body would not exist, the soul would not cease to be what it is -> mind and body are distinct.

Question 5

wat dachten plato en aristotle over mind-body

Answer 5

plato: dualism
aristotle: monism (the soul and the body are in fact linked to form one entity, whereby one simply cannot exist without the other.)

Question 6

“In my college days I
discovered that
nothing can be
imagined which is too
strange or incredible to
have been said by some philosopher”

“Nothing solid could
have been built upon
such shaky
foundations”

Answer 6

descartes

Question 7

“For a long time I had remarked that it is sometimes requisite in common life to follow opinions which one knows to be most uncertain, exactly as though they were indisputable, as has been said above. But because in this case I wished to give myself entirely to the search after truth, I thought that it was necessary for me to take an apparently opposite course, and to reject as absolutely
false everything as to which I could imagine the least ground of doubt, in order to see if afterwards there remained anything in my belief that was entirely certain.

Answer 7

descartes

Question 8

But immediately afterwards I noticed that whilst I thus wished to think all things false, it was absolutely essential that the ‘ I ‘ who thought this should be somewhat, and remarking that this truth “I think therefore I am” was so certain and so assured that all the most extravagant suppositions brought forward by the sceptics were incapable of shaking it, I came to the conclusion that I
could receive it without scruple as the first principle of the Philosophy for which I was seeking.”

Answer 8

oke

Question 9

hoe kwam descartes bij het dualism

Answer 9

hij kon zich wel voorstellen dat hij geen lichaam had, maar hij kon zich niet voorstellen dat hij geen ziel had. daarom: moeten de ziel en het lichaam wel twee aparte dingen van elkaar zijn.

Question 10

And then, examining attentively that which I was, I saw that I could conceive that I had no body, and that there was no world nor place where I might be; but yet that I could not for all that conceive that I was not. On the contrary, I saw from the very fact that I thought of doubting the truth of other things, it very evidently and certainly followed that I was; […] From that I knew that I was a substance the whole essence or nature of which is to think, and that for its existence there is no need of any place, nor does it depend on any material thing; so that this ‘ me,’ that is to say, the soul by which I am what I am, is entirely distinct from body, and is even more easy to know than is the latter; and even if body were not, the soul would not cease to be what it is.

Answer 10

oke

Question 11

dus hoe ging de gedachtegang van descartes

Answer 11

– I doubt
– So there is something that is doubting
– I call that something “the mind”
– I cannot doubt the existence of this mind
– The mind is not material. After all, you can doubt anything that is material
– The mind thus must exist separately from the body: Dualism

Question 12

hoe kwam descartes bij het bestaan van God

Answer 12

• i doubt
• therefore, i am not perfect
• where do i get the idea of perfection then?
• i can think of less perfect things, but not of more perfect things
• the idea of perfection must have been placed inside me by something more perfect than me
• whoever placed that idea of perfection in me must have all the perfection that i can think of
• that is God
• since God is not perceived, the idea of God must be innate

Question 13

dus wat was descartes: rationalist of empiricist

Answer 13

rationalist

Question 14

Because God is perfect, God will not fool us: the world we perceive outside of us, exists!

Answer 14

oke

Question 15

the mind-body problem =

Answer 15

Descartes believes he has proven that the mind is a separate substance. The body, however, he sees as a machine. The mind controls the body; thus body and mind must
interact. But how does the mind receive information from perception, and how does the mind influence the body?

Question 16

hoe kijken we nu naar het dualism

Answer 16

• According to later developed physics, Descartes’ dualism can not be right
• A mind that controls the brain must set something in motion but the mind itself is immaterial and does not fall under the laws of physics
• That would mean that the (Cartesian) mind adds energy out of nothing: This violates the Law of Conservation of Energy
• Moreover, it is now clear that all kinds of traditional “mental” properties can be influenced by e.g. neurosurgery

Question 17

wie gaf kritiek op descartes

Answer 17

Elisabeth of Bohemia

Question 18

“Given that the soul of a human
being is only a thinking substance,
how can it affect the bodily spirits, in
order to bring about voluntary
actions?”
* “I have to say that I would find it
easier to concede matter and
extension of the soul than to concede
that an immaterial thing could move
and be moved by a body…”

Answer 18

elizabeth of bohemia

Question 19

wat is zo raar aan deze redenatie van descartes

Answer 19

Descartes is actually in all aspects a
materialistic and mechanistic
thinker, except for the “soul” -> inconsistent reasoning.

Question 20

But, beware of hindsight bias:
Descartes coundn’t foresee how
physics and neuroscience would
proceed…

Answer 20

oke

Question 21

Descartes’ substance-dualism
(in which the mind is an
immaterial yet causally
effective substance) has been
widely rejected
-> However, there is no
agreement on the alternative

Answer 21

oke

Question 22

Rejecting dualism easily leads to materialism, but…..

Answer 22

does NOT need to imply reductionism!!!!!!!!1

Question 23

reductionism =

Answer 23

the view that theories of mental properties can be reduced to neuroscientific theories.

Question 24

materialism=

Answer 24

nothing exists except matter, its movements and its modifications

Question 25

waarom is descartes een rationalist

Answer 25

Descartes, like Plato, views reason rather
than experience as the primary source of
secure knowledge

Question 26

wat gebeurde er na descartes

Answer 26

juist weer een interesse in empiricism, door de british empiricists.

Question 27

wie waren de british empiricists

Answer 27

John Locke
(1632-1704)

George Berkeley
(1685-1753)

David Hume
(1711-1776)

Question 28

locke argumenten voor empiricism

Answer 28

• “If we will attentively consider
  newborn children, we shall
  have little reason to think that
  they bring many ideas into the
  world with them”
• we dont find universal principles in children
• principles can differ per culture

Question 29

“Let us then suppose the mind to be, as we
say, white paper void of all characters,
without any ideas. How comes it to be
furnished? Whence comes it by that vast
store which the busy and boundless fancy
of man has painted on it with an almost
endless variety? Whence has it all the
materials of reason and knowledge? To this
I answer, in one word, from experience”

Answer 29

locke

Question 30

wie had dus tabula rasa bedacht

Answer 30

aristotle bedacht, locke weer populair gemaakt en herhaald

Question 31

wat voor invloed had de herhaling van de tabula rasa

Answer 31

als alle mensen zouden starten als tabula rasa, dan zou iedereen dus hetzelfde zijn: natural rights.

= political implication

Question 32

op wie reageerde locke

Answer 32

op descartes

Question 33

op wie lijkt locke

Answer 33

aristotle

Question 34

op wie lijkt descartes

Answer 34

plato

Question 35

dus wat switcht steeds tussen rationalisme en empiricisme…

Answer 35

epistemology

Question 36

epistemology=

Answer 36

how do we know what is true?

Question 37

Berkeley takes Locke’s idea
very seriously

Answer 37

oke

Question 38

berkeley = (e/r)

Answer 38

empiricist, assumes that all knowledge comes through the senses

Question 39

dus wat voor vraag stellen bij empiricist / rationalist

Answer 39

does knowledge come through the senses, or via reasoning?

Question 40

met welke vraag heeft berkeley zich vooral bezig gehouden

Answer 40

hij nam aan dat alle knowledge via de senses komt. maar, waardoor komt onze perceptie van deze externe wereld?

Assumes that all knowledge enters through the senses. Concludes that if that is so, we can only be certain of our perceptions, not of a material external world. But then what is it that causes our perception of this external world?

Question 41

“though we give the
Materialists their external
Bodies, they by their own
confession are never the
nearer knowing how our Ideas
are produced: Since they are
on themselves unable to
comprehend in what manner
Body can act upon Spirit, or
how it is possible it should
imprint any Idea in the Mind.”

Answer 41

Berkeley

Question 42

was berkeley een materialist

Answer 42

nee!!!!!!!!!

Question 43

“All our Ideas, Sensations, or the things which we perceive, by whatsoever Names they may be distinguished, are visibly inactive, there is nothing of Power or Agency included in them. So that one Idea or Object of Thought cannot produce, or make any Alteration in another. To be satisfied of the Truth of this, there is nothing else requisite but a bare Observation of our Ideas. For since they and every part of them exist only in the Mind, it follows that there is nothing in them but what is perceived. But whoever shall attend to his Ideas, whether of Sense or Reflexion, will not perceive in them any Power or Activity; there is therefore no such thing contained in them. A little Attention will discover to us that the very Being of an Idea implies Passiveness and Inertness in it, in so much that it is impossible for an Idea to do any thing, or, strictly speaking, to be the Cause of any thing.

“It must therefore be a
Substance; but it has been
shown that there is no
corporeal or material
Substance: It remains
therefore that the Cause of
Ideas is an incorporeal active
Substance or Spirit”

Answer 43

Berkeley

Question 44

dus berkeley: hoe ontstond zijn conclusie over onze perceptie?

Answer 44

What causes our perception of the external world, and our ideas?

• Material substance?
  – No, it’s unclear how physical objects could cause immaterial ideas
• The ideas themselves?
  – No, the ideas themselves are passive
• Ourselves?
  – No, we cannot choose our perceptions
• It must be some other spirit, whose will we experience!

Question 45

wat was Berkeley zijn quote

Answer 45

esse est percipi (to be is to be perceived)

Question 46

esse est percipi betekenis

Answer 46

all properties of reality depend on the mind

Question 47

conclusie van Berkeley

Answer 47

• all properties of reality depend on the mind
• esse est percipi: to be is to be perceived
• the part of the world that we experience as objective is a projection of gods mind
• the world is not material, but it is real. the sun also exists when we close our eyes, maar dit komt omdat God altijd alles nog perceived.

Question 48

dus wat was berkeley

Answer 48

empiricist en idealist

Question 49

idealism =

Answer 49

the metaphysical view that associates reality to ideas in the mind rather than to material objects. It lays emphasis on the mental or spiritual components of experience, and renounces the notion of material existence.

Question 50

dus verschil materialism en idealism

Answer 50

materialism = er bestaat alleen materie
idealism = er bestaan alleen ideas en experiences

Question 51

Can Berkeley still be
considered a British
Empiricist?

Answer 51

• Yes, because also for Berkeley, all knowledge enters us through perception
• The ideas of God are incomprehensible so we cannot deduce them through reasoning; we only have perception to fall back on

Question 52

overeenkomst berkeley en descartes

Answer 52

• Berkeley and Descartes both reason about the foundation of knowledge
• Both formulate a proof of God

Question 53

verschil descartes en berkeley

Answer 53

descartes: physical external world - dualism - reason is source of knowledge (rationalism)

berkeley: god causes the ideas within us - idealism - perception is the source of knowledge (empiricism)

Question 54

who is prob one of the most influential thinkers regarding science

Answer 54

Hume

Question 55

welk probleem introduceerde Hume

Answer 55

problem of induction

Question 56

wat zei hume over empirical knowledge

Answer 56

empirical knowledge is generated through the copy principle

Question 57

copy principle =

Answer 57

• experiences result in impressions in the mind
• when to states of affairs occur repeatedly together, their impressions in the mind will be associated

= correlation

Question 58

nog een vraag voor het verschil tussen empiricism en rationalism

Answer 58

wat dachten ze dat de waarheid was: reason of senses?

dus waar haal je waarheid uit? door deductive reasoning, of observation

Question 59

waar was locke het mee eens met descartes

Answer 59

just because our senses give us knowledge, does not mean we can trust it

Question 60

nog kleine overview van crashcourse on berkeley

Answer 60

berkeley dacht; there is no such thing as matter, only perception! je kan geen appel voorstellen zonder kleur of textuur. dus er zijn geen objecten, alleen perceivers, disembodied minds, perceiving things that are not really there.

Question 61

wat zei hume over correlation

Answer 61

• Such an association can be seen as a correlation
• However, our reasoning goes beyond correlations
• For example, we use the idea of causation: “the spark caused the explosion”, “the lack of dopamine caused Parkinson”, “prozac resulted
  in improvement”

Question 62

Humes 3 principles of causality

Answer 62

1. proximity of cause and effect
2. cause precedes effect
3. necessary connection between cause and effect

Question 63

proximity of cause and effect

Answer 63

– the billiard player hits the white ball and
right after that (near in time) the white
ball hits the black ball (near in space)
which then disappears into the pocket

Question 64

cause precedes effect

Answer 64

the billiard player first hit the white ball,
and thereafter the black ball disappeared
into the pocket

Question 65

necessary connection between cause and effect

Answer 65

when the billiard player hits the white
ball, the black ball always (necessarily)
disappears in the pocket

(deze weten we nooit zeker!!! dus er wordt nooit voldaan aan de derde eis)

Question 66

“We remember to have had frequent instances of the existence of one species of objects; and also remember, that the individuals of another species of objects have always attended them, and have existed in a regular order of contiguity and succession with regard to them. Thus we remember, to have seen that species of object we call flame, and to have felt that species of sensation we call heat. We likewise call to mind their constant conjunction in all past instances. Without any farther ceremony, we call the one cause and the other effect, and infer the existence of the one from that of the other.”

Answer 66

oke

Question 67

dus als je ziet staan conjunction, correlation of causation is het

Answer 67

hume

Question 68

“… All those objects, of which we call the one
cause and the other effect, considered in
themselves, are as distinct and separate from
each other, as any two things in nature, nor
can we ever, by the most accurate survey of
them, infer the existence of the one from that
of the other. It is only from experience and
the observation of their constant union, that
we are able to form this inference; and even
after all, the inference is nothing but the
effects of custom [habit] on the imagination. We must affirm that the necessary
connection is not discovered by a conclusion
of the understanding, but is merely a
perception of the mind. ”

Answer 68

hume

Question 69

what is the problem of induction

Answer 69

• Induction is the generalization of observed cases to all cases
• For example: so far I have only seen white swans, so all swans are white
• Inferring causality also relies on induction
• You observe a flame and in past cases that has coincided with feeling heat, therefore you think that a flame always coincides with heat: a necessary connection, Fire causes heat!
• However, induction is a logically invalid form of reasoning: the conclusion does not follow from the premises

Question 70

wat vond hume over onze realiteit

Answer 70

• Hume, just like Locke and Berkeley, believes that all knowledge comes from experience
• Causal relations, according to his own criterion, cannot come from experience alone
• And so Hume concludes that causal relations should not play a role in our desription of empirical reality

Question 71

“If we take in our hand any
volume; of divinity or school
metaphysics, for instance; let us
ask, Does it contain any abstract
reasoning concerning quantity or
number? No. Does it contain any
experimental reasoning
concerning matter of fact and
existence? No. Commit it then to
the flames: for it can contain
nothing but sophistry and
illusion.”

Answer 71

hume

Question 72

• Hume’s induction problem is a threat for all kinds of knowledge
• After all, almost all science and philosophy is based on generalization
• Laws are nothing more than habits in which we came to see necessity
• If general laws and causal relationships cannot be proven, then nothing is certain anymore…

Answer 72

oke

Question 73

• The problem of induction is one of the major engines behind philosophy and methodology
• Bayesianism as a response to the induction problem
• All philosophers who came after Hume had to relate to this problem
• Much of the methodology you’ve had is a practical response to Hume’s objections

Answer 73

oke

Question 74

“I freely admit that it was the
remembrance of David Hume which, many
years ago, first interrupted my dogmatic
slumber and gave my investigations in the
field of speculative philosophy a completely
different direction.”

Answer 74

kant

Question 75

waar hield kant zich mee bezig

Answer 75

• Kant wants to save Newton from Hume
• Kant agrees with Hume that necessity cannot come from experience
• But there are examples of necessary and universal knowledge: e.g. math!
• Where does such knowledge come from?

Question 76

wat was Kant zijn oplossing voor het probleem van waar knowledge vandaan komt

Answer 76

humans themselves bring concepts such as time, space and causality with them as a priori categories with which they structure their perception. therefore experiences are rationally loaded, and causal relationships arise from a kind of mixture of ratio and empiricism.

Question 77

dus kant samenvatting

Answer 77

the perception of reality combined with a priori knowledge together result in experience -> the two cannot be separated!!!!

deze is belangrijkkkkkkkkk leren

Question 78

“Thoughts without content are empty,
intuitions (perceptions) without concepts
are blind”

Answer 78

Kant!!!!

Question 79

Kant: experience gets its….

Answer 79

content from the external world but its understanding from the mind

Question 80

nog een keer de hoofdboodschap van kant

Answer 80

perception of reality combined with a priori knowledge together results in experience

Question 81

hoe is kant nu nog aanwezig

Answer 81

• The idea of a priori categories (causality, time, order, unity) is part of (neo-)Kantian approaches
• The question of whether such categories really exist is studied with baby and animal research
• Here the idea is that if babies or chicks are susceptible to causal relationships, the category “causal” must be inborn

Question 82

“One may perceive how, by degrees, afterwards, ideas come into their [new born babies’] minds; and that they get no more, nor other, than what experience, and the observation of things that come in their way, furnish them with.”

Answer 82

locke

Question 83

“If I had existed alone, and independently of every other being, so as to have had from myself all the perfection, however little, which I actually possessed, I should have been able, for the same reason, to have had from myself the whole remainder of perfection, of the want of which I was conscious, and thus could of myself have become infinite, eternal, immutable, omniscient, all-powerful, and, in fine, have possessed all the perfections which I could recognize in God.”

Answer 83

descartes

Question 84

• At the beginning of the 18th century it became
  increasingly clear that philosophical issues are
  partly rooted in the structure of our psyche itself
  (see Hume, Kant)
• For a thinker like Francis Bacon, science rests
  fundamentally on a certain attitude towards our
  own psychological constitution
• The question of how exactly our thinking works
  therefore becomes very important
• Attention moves towards the question of whether
  this “thinking” itself can be studied scientifically…

Answer 84

oke

Question 85

dus descartes was perfection, berkeley was perception

Answer 85

oke

Question 86

wat dacht descartes over het lichaam

Answer 86

the body is a machine

Question 87

wat was de soil voor het terugkeren van empiricism

Answer 87

het mind-body probleem van descartes

Question 88

wat is recent bewijs tegen locke

Answer 88

We weten nu dat je wel een soort moral knowledge hebt in chimps, dus dit is wel weer een beetje refuted. Maar we weten iig dat leren ook heel belangrijk is!

Question 89

wat dacht berkeley dus over physical objects

Answer 89

physical objects are a bundle of ideas, exist because of our minds

Question 90

wat was een beetje het probleem van hume

Answer 90

hij zei dat niks in science meer mogelijk was;

• Laws are nothing more than habits in which we came to see necessity.
• If general laws and causal relationships cannot be proven, then nothing is certain anymore.

Question 91

kijken naar tijdlijn

Answer 91

oke

Question 92

Kant reageerde op Hume: “causaliteit bestaat al, maar het is aangeboren”. Probeerde een oplossing te vinden voor het probleem

Answer 92

oke