use one of the WRAITEC ( The goodthinker’s toolkit) letters as a tool to prompt yourself.
How does one use WRAITEC? It is rather straightforward; pick one of the letters (such as R for reasons) and focus on the reasons for Aristotle making this or that claim. Any letter can be used, but be sure to be clear which it is you are using (at least for these first couple weeks of class).
Additionally, you owe your fellow inquirers two replies. This means you can either reply to two different classmate’s responses, or respond to someone who has replied to you. These replies should actually attempt to engage with your eachother. Posts consisting of very basic sentiments (mere regurgitation of what your class mate has said in order to prove you read their post to me), will receive no credit. A good way to not make a mistake here is by asking questions of your fellows. Such questions will encourage further conversation. These replies should be about 50-100 words,
Ultimately, this means I want to see three things from you weekly: a response, and two replies.
A note on grading: these assignments are credit/no-credit (either 1 point or no points). You make ask the question “if there are two replies, and I only do one, do I get half credit?” The answer is no–Half points will not be awarded for these assignments. Also not that these weekly assignments total 30% of your overall grade (responses being 15% and replies being 15%). I mention this, because missing these assignments will quickly add up to hurt your grade with no way to really earn points back in this category.
This week PDFs, discussion question and audio file is in below link:
first:I think that James and Locke have a few similarities in their approach to Epistemology. I find that Jame’s Pragmatic theory of truth and knowledge as useful makes alot of sense to me and helps to be question things that I believe to be true. In the attempt to disprove his theory I found that all the statements I know to be true are also useful. For example, say my lamplight was broke. If there was a crack in the bulb or the light would not turn on, it would be a true statement to say that it was broken because I can see with my own eyes that it is broken and thus it is useful to me to know that it is broken. I think this relates to Locke’s foundation of knowledge and his two levels (Primary and Secondary) . Both of these levels help to solidify the validity of something and it’s usefulness. I believe Jame’s ideas are best summed up in his response, “: True ideas are those that we can assimilate, validate, corroborate and verify. False ideas are those that we cannot. ” While not exactly the same as what Locke believes about epistemology, the two connect very well.
Second:(C) Both David Hume and John Locke are British empiricists, meaning that they both consider experience as an important part of acquiring knowledge and that evidence is more functional than innate ideas. In his article, John Yolton discusses the concept of experience in John Locke and David Hume’s philosophical views. He highlights an important difference in the two being that “Locke sought to show how experience is of the world, Hume tried to show how experience restricts our valid conceptual contents to certain sorts of ideas, eliminating others.” This relates to Hume’s problem with inductive logic. He believes one cannot just use past experience to assume future events. This type of causality is driven by habits, impressions, and passions according to Hume. For example, if one turns a switch up and a lamplight comes on, one might assume that this is the function of all lamplights, until one day they are confronted with a more modern sliding lamp feature to adjust lighting gradually, as to set a particular ambiance, instead of flipping it up and down for total light or total darkness. This challenges the preconceived notion of lamp switches. He thought was that our beliefs are an accumulation of our sensory experiences of the world, but this causes uncertainties because we do not think about the background of our knowledge. He was influential in his skepticism of the scientific method and whether it was justifiable. I think Hume’s skeptical ideas are beneficial to challenge individuals to think about their assumptions of the world because it may lead to great realizations.2 attachmentsSlide 1 of 2