Get acquainted with predicate logic in one sitting

The Logic Ninja

Thank you, Professor Baber, for teaching me the basics of predicate logic in one sitting.

New iTunesU Course available

Exploring Philosophy - Audio

by The Open University

Description

Have you ever considered what being conscious actually means? By choosing to live in a particular state are you consenting to be subject to all its laws? For some there’s an assumption that philosophy might not be relevant to modern life but Dr. Nigel Warburton, senior lecturer in Philosophy at the Open University argues that many of us today are faced with philosophical questions such as these as we live our lives in the twenty first century. In this collection we ask academics to discuss these questions in addition to other important philosophical issues and concepts such as the morality of abortions and the reconciling a world with evil and a good God. This material forms part of the Open University course A222 Exploring philosophy.

Website
Direct iTunes Store Link

The benefit of taking philosophy courses

I have never set foot inside a college classroom to study philosophy (technology, business, and jazz piano were my subjects).  Over the last year my free moments have mostly gone towards studying philosophy.  (A 'free moment' is the hour before work when my wife is still tucked into bed.)  My understanding of the subject seems to be moving along nicely, but my belief is that studying philosophy in the academy admits of some considerable benefits.

1. Guidance while wading through obscure passages and authors.  For instance: elusive German philosophers whose names begin with 'H' (Husserl, Heidegger, and Hegel).
2. Feedback on writing skills, weak points, and general grasp of the topic at hand.
3. Question/answer with the professor.
4. Generally you would expect the professor to give an overview of relevant themes, historical contexts, trends, important versus non-important aspect, etc.

Now an objection: given the wealth of materials available to any earnest student, surely classroom learning is commensurate with solitary study.  Of course, the ceteris paribus here is the effort put forth by the student to master the subject.  But commensurate with respect to what?  An isolated student can achieve the same quality education as the collegiate student, but probably not in the same amount of time.  You pay to progress at a more efficient rate.  And that might persuade someone to pay tuition.  It has even tempted me a few times.

But this only applies to undergraduate courses.  I have no idea what the average grad course in philosophy is like.  But this I do know: my chances are slim for acceptance into an upper level philosophy program without an undergrad degree.  

Free eBook - Reading for Philosophical Inquiry

Reading for Philosophical Inquiry: A Brief Introduction to Philosophical Thinking by John G. Archie (html) (pdf)

Reading philosophy

“Preface to Philosophy,” by Mark B. Woodhouse

How to comprehend hard stuff more easily

Don't just read Locke; read Locke and see if he stands up to Adler's critiques.

Don't just read Plantinga; read Plantinga and look for Alston's fingerprints.

Don't just read Rowe; compare three of Rowe's essays on the same topic and see how the argument has taken shape.

Berkley Webcasts: Searle and the Philosophy of Mind

Alongside a host of free academic courses, there are two free philosophy courses available here via webcast.berkley.  I have listened to John Searle's course on the Philosophy of Mind (Philosophy 132) twice now, thanks to my 25 minute commute to work each morning and afternoon.

These 32 mp3 recordings capture virtually everything that happened during that semester of the course: lectures, lucid accounts from Searle about his life experiences and about philosophy in general, student questions, a couple of lively teacher/student debates (one student defensively launches some theistic arguments at Searle after he makes a few unsympathetic remarks about religion), and most importantly, Searle's exposition of his philosophy of the mind, aka "biological naturalism."  (For a concise description of biological naturalism, see Edward Feser's unpublished paper entitled, "Why Searle Is a Property Dualist."  Another summary is given in this article.)

The clarity and depth of Searle's teaching can't be overstated, especially regarding the various arguments against materialism (Nagel's bat, Mary's color, the Chinese Room, etc).  Almost half of the course is geared towards evaluating materialism, while the other half explores perception and intentionality.  If you think naive realism has been ruled out, think again.  Also, if you think naturalism precludes intentionality, Searle might at least challenge you to move beyond the usual rhetoric that gets tossed at naturalists regarding intentionality (I still maintain that intentionality is a serious problem for most naturalistic theories of the mind).

I'm no expert on Descartes but suspect that a few of Searle's comments would raise a few hackles among the Cartesian crowd. For instance, he stressed that Descartes distinguished the body from the mind but he doesn't mention how they can interact together to constitute a third substance.  He also doesn't mention that Descartes may not have exclusively identified person with their minds (see Feser, Philosophy of Mind, p. 21).

Searle gives out a suprisingly quick and dirty response to Plantinga's modal argument for dualism. Here's a rough formulation of Plantinga's argument:

1. If me = my body, then whatever is true of me is true of my body and vice versa.
2. 'Possibly exists when body doesn't' is true of me but not true of my body.
3. Therefore, I am not identical to my body.

A student presents the argument and asks him what he thinks of it, and almost without hesitation Searle replies, "thinkability is not a property."  Others have criticized Plantinga's argument in similar fashion.

Overall, I found this course to be immensely helpful and insightful.  Surely I didn't comprehend the material as well as the students who attended the class and did the required readings.  But that wasn't the goal.  The goal was to absorb the landscape, to make a mental map of the bigger picture before attacking a full-length text on the subject.

Before reading a serious text, if I haven't familiarized myself sufficiently with the topic or author, I will skim through an introductory text or listen to audio material on the topic (there is something about passively listening while driving or running on the treadmill that soaks the information into your neurons in a different, but nonetheless useful way).  If intro texts or audio aren't readily available, I scan the entire text very quickly (as quick as you can run your eyes down the page), only pausing at the topic sentences of the main sections.  I can sprint through a book in about 20 minutes in this fashion, and believe it or not, I find that pre-scanning increases my ability to understand the material once I start reading it at a normal pace.  Sometimes a third reading is required if I'm going to take detailed notes and really interact with the material.  Perhaps others can get away with just reading difficult books once, but not this fellow!

Taking notes

Taking Notes On Philosophical Texts, by Peter Suber