|Free Kindle ☹ Doing Philosophy: From Common Curiosity to Logical Reasoning ⚕ eBooks or Kindle ePUB free

As a systematic, methodological form of inquiry, philosophy is a science, but not a natural science The main thesis of this book is that philosophy is a kind of broadly understood science It argues for this claim as follows Chap 1 Common Sense Both science and philosophy begin by aiming to explain the way things seem to be Of course, the way things seem to be may turn out to be wrong Nevertheless, it remains the natural starting point of inquiry Theories are developed to explain why mAs a systematic, methodological form of inquiry, philosophy is a science, but not a natural science The main thesis of this book is that philosophy is a kind of broadly understood science It argues for this claim as follows Chap 1 Common Sense Both science and philosophy begin by aiming to explain the way things seem to be Of course, the way things seem to be may turn out to be wrong Nevertheless, it remains the natural starting point of inquiry Theories are developed to explain why murder seems to be wrong, or why the sun seems to revolve around the earth Chap 3 Disputing Each theory tends to have both advocates and critics which dispute with each other to assess the relevant strengths and weaknesses of the particular theory Both appeal to evidence to strengthen their theory, which tends to be intuitions in philosophy and observations in science Both also appeal to counterevidence to weaken their opponent s theory, which tends to be intuitions or observations that contradict the theory For example, utilitarians will point to utilitarianism s intuitive results it is good to save someone s life because it maximises utility happiness , while non utilitarians will point to intuitions which contradict utilitarianism it is wrong to kill an innocent person to save many others Chap 5 6 Experiments Comparing Theories Counterevidence is discovered using experiments Science generally uses natural experiments while philosophy generally uses thought experiments Theories are then compared using the inference to the best explanation, which weighs the theoretical virtues of simplicity, coherence, and , to decide between rival theories Overall, this is a great although admittedly one sided analysis of philosophical methodology I highly recommend it to philosophy students A decent little introduction to contemporary primarily analytic philosophy Williamson focuses on the methodology of philosophy and sometimes contrasts and sometimes compares it to the other sciences Williamson doesn t really touch on the subfield of ethics at all as he is mostly concerned with logic, epistemology and metaphysics The author succeeds in emphasising the oft contested relevance of philosophy and is rather humble in his writing For anyone not all too familiar with philosophy an A decent little introduction to contemporary primarily analytic philosophy Williamson focuses on the methodology of philosophy and sometimes contrasts and sometimes compares it to the other sciences Williamson doesn t really touch on the subfield of ethics at all as he is mostly concerned with logic, epistemology and metaphysics The author succeeds in emphasising the oft contested relevance of philosophy and is rather humble in his writing For anyone not all too familiar with philosophy and it s methods, this is a nice place to start This was a really nice and basic overview of the goals of philosophy and philosophical methodology There wasn t heaps in here that I was unfamiliar with, but despite that I think it helped to systematise my understanding of philosophy. Does what it says on the tin, it s a clear guide to the methods we use to do philosophy I read it as a refresher while I try to sort out a framework for introducing my young children to critical thinking and logical reasoning If they were older, I would have simply passed them this book There is none of the usual name dropping, assumed knowledge, or obscure referencing that often scares people off of their curiosity toward philosophy Easy to follow and very instructive Read this before you Does what it says on the tin, it s a clear guide to the methods we use to do philosophy I read it as a refresher while I try to sort out a framework for introducing my young children to critical thinking and logical reasoning If they were older, I would have simply passed them this book There is none of the usual name dropping, assumed knowledge, or obscure referencing that often scares people off of their curiosity toward philosophy Easy to follow and very instructive Read this before you start your freshman Phil class, and you ll be in good shape Philosophy is a science, albeit a distinct one It s a science in that it s a methodical and logical field of inquiry comparable with the natural sciences Where the natural sciences study the natural world, philosophy studies the language and concepts we use to communicate about the world and the laws of logic that govern all forms of argumentation Thus, philosophy is not in competition with the sciences In fact, all scientific inquiry benefits from and ultimately depends upon philosophy.Act Philosophy is a science, albeit a distinct one It s a science in that it s a methodical and logical field of inquiry comparable with the natural sciences Where the natural sciences study the natural world, philosophy studies the language and concepts we use to communicate about the world and the laws of logic that govern all forms of argumentation Thus, philosophy is not in competition with the sciences In fact, all scientific inquiry benefits from and ultimately depends upon philosophy.Actionable advice Sharpen your analytical thinking skills by putting one of your convictions to the test.First, think of something that you really, firmly believe Write it down It could be something as simple as the sun will rise tomorrow Now, try to come up with two or three reasons why that belief may be false Then, respond to each of the points with a good counter argument As I evaluate it, this is a book on ideas philosophically understood from within the analytic tradition which seriously tries to avoid the ultimate problem of skepticism In the Introduction, Williamson notes Descartes radical strategy of doubting what he could, including the whole world outside his mind, in order to rebuild science on the firm foundation of the few remaining certainties p 1 Prior to its professional status in academia, philosophy is already in our lives both in trivial a As I evaluate it, this is a book on ideas philosophically understood from within the analytic tradition which seriously tries to avoid the ultimate problem of skepticism In the Introduction, Williamson notes Descartes radical strategy of doubting what he could, including the whole world outside his mind, in order to rebuild science on the firm foundation of the few remaining certainties p 1 Prior to its professional status in academia, philosophy is already in our lives both in trivial and important ways, the author maintains In other words, philosophy is there as common sense With this observation, I have no quarrel But having read Leslie Dewart s 1022 2009 Hume s Challenge and the Renewal of Modern Philosophy, published posthumously, I do not concur with many of Williamson s conclusions, since I am a philosopher who favours the phenomenological perspective He seems to admit such a possibility when he writes Many philosophers will hate my picture of how to do philosophy I leave the reader to judge p 5 I am not convinced that contemporary philosophy s stagnated state as Dewart described it is solved by philosophers embracing the appropriate scientific methods for answering their questions, which are questions of the traditional ambitious kind p 5 However, that is not to say that the book is not worth the time taken to read it In Chapter 9 Williamson advances some ways by which philosophy learns from elsewhere p.111 He concludes the book by expressing the hope that philosophical methods can be improved, possibly with the assistance of a future reader of his essay just as scientific methods have been improved over time I share a similar hope for the development of philosophy but, in light of Dewart s insights, my hope is expressed through a phenomenological perspective |Free Kindle ♔ Doing Philosophy: From Common Curiosity to Logical Reasoning ☣ What are philosophers trying to achieve How can they succeed Does philosophy make progress Is it in competition with science, or doing something completely different, or neither In Doing Philosophy, Timothy Williamson tackles some of the key questions surrounding philosophy in new and provocative ways, showing how philosophy begins in common sense curiosity, and develops through our capacity to dispute rationally with each other Discussing philosophy s ability to clarify our thoughts, he explains why such clarification depends on the development of philosophical theories, and how those theories can be tested by imaginative thought experiments, and compared against each other by standards similar to those used in the natural and social sciences He also shows how logical rigor can be understood as a way of enhancing the explanatory power of philosophical theoriesDrawing on the history of philosophy to provide a track record of philosophical thinking s successes and failures, Williams overturns widely held dogmas about the distinctive nature of philosophy in comparison to the sciences, demystifies its methods, and considers the future of the discipline From thought experiments, to deduction, to theories, this little book will cause you to totally rethink what philosophy is As for philosophy, it is about issues that give general information about life, the universe, principle, and hostility Therefore, it may be called cosmic knowledge, and this is not specific to a special group of information, such as science, which is a private sect, and therefore speaks in philosophy about existence and non existence And the essence, essences, symptoms, etc., and that was why the philosopher in the previous time seeks to absorb science, then seeks to extract unified philosophy As for philosophy, it is about issues that give general information about life, the universe, principle, and hostility Therefore, it may be called cosmic knowledge, and this is not specific to a special group of information, such as science, which is a private sect, and therefore speaks in philosophy about existence and non existence And the essence, essences, symptoms, etc., and that was why the philosopher in the previous time seeks to absorb science, then seeks to extract unified philosophy from all of those Do philosophy matter in this modern era What good could they bring in this science led civilization How a question like why is there something rather than nothing could help us anyway How philosophy is also a part of science If you think philosophy has become irrelevant or science could solve all the problems then this is a good read for you Thanks Blinkist for existing.