On My Philosophical Method
by Dennis J. Darland June 13, 2007 Revised January 1 , 2011 Revised !to pd"# May $, 2011 %opyri&ht ' 2011 Dennis J. Darland
No Dogmatism
( a) not do&)atic about anythin& that ( say here. ( a) "ra)in& de"initions and e*planations that ( thin+ )ay solve so)e philosophical proble)s or pu,,les. ( a) then tryin& to see -hat "ollo-s "ro) the de"initions and assu)ptions that ( )a+e. .he reason "or acceptin& )y de"initions and assu)ptions is that they can handle the philosophical proble)s / because the ri&ht conclusions "ollo-. .he Pre"ace to Principia Mathe)atica said so)ethin& si)ilar about 0hitehead and Russell1s -or+2 3 ... the chie" reason in "avour o" any theory on the principles o" )athe)atics )ust al-ays be inductive, i.e. it )ust lie in the "act that the theory in 4uestion enables us to deduce ordinary )athe)atics. (n )athe)atics, the &reatest de&ree o" sel"/evidence is usually not to be "ound at the be&innin&, but at so)e later point5 hence the early deductions, until they reach this point, &ive reasons rather "or believin& the pre)ises because true conse4uences "ollo- "ro) the), than "or believin& the conse4uences because they "ollo- "ro) the pre)ises3
Thinking
(t see)s to )e that the educational syste) tries to )a+e students )e)ori,e thin&s, -hen it should be helpin& students understand the). (" you use so)ethin& enou&h you -ill re)e)ber it. .here is little point to )e)ori,in& so)ethin& "or an e*a), only to "or&et it the ne*t day. (" you understand it, even i" you don1t re)e)ber the details, then you -ill +no- ho- to loo+ it up and apply it. 161762011 / .here see) to be li)its to )y previous vie-. One thin& one needs to learn is vocabulary. ( no)a+e it a point to loo+ up any -ords ( a) not sure o" the )eanin& o" / so)eti)es there are additional )eanin& to the ones ( )ay already +no-. 8ut, )aybe because ( a) &ettin& a little old, ( "ind ( )ust loo+ up a -ord a "e- ti)es be"ore ( re)e)ber it.
Testing the Consequences
(1ve been tryin& to test that the conse4uences that ( say "ollo-s "ro) )y de"initions really do "ollo-. ( have been usin& Prolo& to do that. .o help "ollo- )y use o" Prolo&, ( -ill &ive a very brie" e*planation o" part o" Prolo& here. 69 : co))ent. // ;irst -e -ill state so)e "acts. 0e -ill ta+e to), harry and <ac+ to be people. to), harry and <ac+ are ob<ects. Ob<ects start -ith lo-er case letters. 96 69 person and "ather are predicates. Predicates also start -ith lo-er case letters. 96 person!to)#. person!harry#. person!<ac+#. "ather!to),harry#. 69 to) is harry1s "ather / the order is arbitrary but -e )ust settle on one. 9.6
"ather!<ac+,to)#. 69 0e can no- de"ine paternal=&rand"ather. >ariables start -ith a capital letter. 96 paternal=&rand"ather!?,@# 2/ "ather!?,A#, "ather!A,@#. 69 (.e. i" ? is the "ather o" A and A is the "ather o" @ then ? is the paternal &rand"ather o" @. 96 69 .his -ill be true in Prolo& i" there are values o" variables -hich satis"y the rule this is chec+ed recursively / ( a) not sho-in& that here. 96 69 0e can no- )a+e a 4uery. 0e enter the ne*t line interactively a"ter loadin& the above "acts "ro) one or )ore "iles. 96 paternal=&rand"ather!:,8#. 69 Prolo& -ill respond so)ethin& li+e 96 : B <ac+ 8 B harry 69 (" -e enter a se)icolon, then Prolo& -ill try to see i" there are other cases -here it is true / i" -e <ust enter a return, then Prolo& -ill stop instead o" chec+in& "urther. 96 69 0e can also try interactively 96 person!to)#. 69 Prolo& -ill respond so)ethin& li+e2 96 Aes 69 but i" -e try2 96 person!bertrand#. 69 0e &et 96 Co 69 Prolo& ta+es as "alse anythin& it cannot prove. .his has to be +ept in )ind. (t is )ore o" a proble) in real -orld applications o" Prolo& than in philosophical applications. 0e can pretend, in philosophy, that our data is the -hole -orldD 96 69 :lso, in case you didn1t "i&ure it out the predicate le"t o" 12/1 is de"ined as true i" -hat is on the ri&ht is true. : co))a )eans 1and1. 96 69 1or1 is usually &otten by havin& t-o rules de"inin& the sa)e predicate. 96 8ac+ to inde*