📘 Study Notes for the Preliminary Exam

Subject: Introduction to Philosophy 12

Early philosophical thought did not only begin in Greece but also emerged in other
great civilizations like India, East Asia, and the Middle East. These regions played a
significant role in shaping foundational ideas in philosophy. The development of
agriculture, such as the domestication of animals and plants, allowed early humans
to settle and gain leisure time. With that time, they began to reflect on their lives
and ask deep, meaningful questions—thus, philosophy was born.
One of the earliest philosophers, Thales, believed that the basic element of
everything was water. This early attempt at explaining the world around us is part of
what we now call Metaphysics, the branch of philosophy concerned with the
nature of reality. Another branch, Epistemology, deals with the study of knowledge
—how we know what we know. So, when you ask, “How can I know the world?”, you
are engaging with epistemological thinking.
In addition to these, Value Theory explores questions about what we should value
and how we should act. For example, asking “Which books should I donate?” is a
question rooted in value theory because it involves determining what is worthwhile.
Meanwhile, Ethics is another branch of philosophy that focuses on morality, and
Aesthetics studies beauty and artistic expression.
Philosophical questions are those that deal with abstract and fundamental ideas,
such as “Who am I?” and “What is critical thinking?”. In contrast, questions like
“Where do I live?” are practical but not philosophical. In the modern world, we still
use philosophy because it helps us reason, make sound decisions, and reflect
deeply about life, making it a valuable guide even in the 21st century.
To evaluate arguments and reason properly, philosophers use tools such as Logic,
which is often called the philosopher’s toolbox. In logic, deductive arguments are
considered either valid or invalid depending on whether the conclusion follows
necessarily from the premises. These types of arguments can give 100% certainty
when structured correctly. On the other hand, inductive arguments, which are
based on observation or experience, are evaluated as either strong or weak,
depending on how likely the conclusion is to be true.
The goal of philosophical discourse is not to show off or argue for the sake of
winning but to seek the truth. For example, if someone says “All fathers are men.
Bob is a man. Therefore, Bob is a father,” the argument is invalid because the
conclusion does not logically follow from the premises. However, saying “All dogs
have long tails. Fido is a dog. Therefore, Fido has a long tail” is valid if we accept the
first premise as true. Similarly, reasoning like “I always watch the game and my
team loses. I’ll watch tomorrow, so they’ll lose again” would be considered a strong
inductive argument if the pattern is consistent.
Inductive reasoning is often used to anticipate future events, like predicting the
weather based on past experiences. However, not all situations require it. For
example, guessing someone's nationality just by their name is not a sound use of
inductive reasoning. In research, deductive reasoning is commonly used in
quantitative studies, where general theories are applied to specific data.
Plato’s famous Allegory of the Cave appears in his work The Republic. In the
allegory, prisoners are chained inside a cave, able only to see shadows cast on the
wall. These shadows represent the only “reality” they know. One prisoner escapes
and discovers the World of Forms, a realm of truth and higher reality outside the
cave. The allegory mainly reflects the philosophical branches of Metaphysics and
Epistemology, as it explores the nature of reality and the process of gaining
knowledge.
The philosophical importance of the allegory lies in how it challenges previously
accepted truths—like old beliefs that the Earth was flat or that it was the center of
the universe. A modern example of living out this allegory would be someone
realizing that teddy bears are not real bears—an awakening to a deeper
understanding. It also shows Platonic doubt, which is the questioning of what we
believe to be true, such as when someone investigates whether a politician is truly
credible.
Finally, according to Plato, the World of Pure Forms is represented by the world
outside the cave. This is in contrast to the shadows inside the cave or the prisoners
who remain there. Only the escaped prisoner who sees the true world has
encountered this higher level of reality.

🌀 Rambled Logic Review Notes

VALID vs INVALID & STRONG vs WEAK

✏️VALID or INVALID? (Deductive Arguments)

 Okay so look, an argument is valid if the conclusion makes sense
based on the given statements. Even if the real-world facts are
weird, as long as the logic connects, it’s valid. If the pieces don’t
connect properly, it’s invalid. Let’s go:
 If all dogs are mammals and a poodle is a dog, then yeah, duh, a
poodle is a mammal. That checks out. ✅ VALID.
 But now if all birds can fly and penguins are birds, and someone says
penguins can fly—uh, nope. Penguins don’t fly, so that logic breaks.
❌ INVALID.
 If Mark’s a student and all students take the final exam, then yes,
he’s taking that exam. No skipping. ✅ VALID.
 But saying all cats are animals and all dogs are animals, so all dogs
are cats? Wait, what? That’s like saying “All teachers are people, and
all students are people, so all students are teachers.” ❌ INVALID.
  If it rains, the ground gets wet. The ground’s wet. So, did it rain?
Maybe, but maybe someone just washed the car. Not always the
same. ❌ INVALID.
 All squares are rectangles and you’ve got a square? Then yeah, it’s a
rectangle too. ✅ VALID.
 If you study, you’ll pass. But you didn’t study. Can we say you’ll fail?
Not necessarily—some people just wing it. ❌ INVALID.
 All roses are flowers, and tulips are flowers. But that doesn’t mean
tulips are roses. That’s like saying “All chips are snacks. Candy is a
snack. So, candy is chips.” ❌ INVALID.
 If I’m hungry, I’ll eat. I didn’t eat. Am I not hungry? Maybe I just
don’t feel like eating. Doesn’t prove anything. ❌ INVALID.
 Bachelors are unmarried. Carl’s a bachelor. So, Carl’s unmarried.
This is just definition logic. ✅ VALID.

💪 STRONG or WEAK? (Inductive Arguments)

 Now this part is about likelihood. If the conclusion seems pretty
believable based on what we’ve observed, that’s a strong argument.
If it feels like a big leap, then it’s weak.
 Snow comes every winter, and it’s winter now? Yeah, snow’s
probably coming. ❄️✅ STRONG.
 Maria eats chocolate every day and never gets sick… so chocolate
prevents sickness? Uhh, no. That’s a chocolate fantasy. 🍫 ❌ WEAK.
 Your cousin drives a red car and always gets pulled over, and you
think red cars attract police? Might be something to that. 🚗✅
STRONG.
 Everyone on the block owns dogs and your new neighbor has a
leash? Pretty good chance they’ve got a dog. 🐶 ✅ STRONG.
 You met three Filipinos who sing great and now you say all Filipinos
are good singers? Love the hype, but that’s way too general. 🎤 ❌
WEAK.
 The sun has never skipped a day. Today’s just another day. Yeah, it’s
rising. ☀️✅ STRONG.
 Sarah from Australia likes surfing, so now all Aussies love surfing?
That’s one person. Chill. 🏄 ❌ WEAK.
 The bus is always on time at 7:00 AM and now it’s 7:00? Bet it’s
showing up soon. 🚌 ✅ STRONG.
 First two customers liked your new bread, and you assume everyone
will? That’s risky—two people aren’t everyone. 🍞 ❌ WEAK.
 Every time you drink milk, you sneeze. You just drank milk. Get
ready to sneeze. 🥛✅ STRONG.
 James directs box office hits like a pro. He’s dropping a new movie?
Probably gonna be a hit too. 🎬✅ STRONG.