1 / 13

The Reason-Giving Game

The Reason-Giving Game. 80-100: Introduction to Philosophy May 21, 2009 Instructor: Karin Howe Carnegie Mellon University. The Reason-Giving Game. Models philosophical inquiry as a reason-giving game The players: A: "the claimant" B: "the challenger". Moves in the game.

henry-malone
Download Presentation

The Reason-Giving Game

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Reason-Giving Game 80-100: Introduction to Philosophy May 21, 2009 Instructor: Karin Howe Carnegie Mellon University

  2. The Reason-Giving Game • Models philosophical inquiry as a reason-giving game • The players: • A: "the claimant" • B: "the challenger"

  3. Moves in the game • Claims (two kinds) • Challenges (two kinds) • Defendings (two kinds) • Retractions • Withdrawals

  4. Two kinds of claims • Presumptive • Non-presumptive • What's the difference? • Presumptive claims are claims that can be taken as given, because they are acceptable to both parties given their shared common ground • What effect does advancing a claim have on the game?

  5. Two kinds of challenges • Bare • Assertional • What's the difference? • An assertional challenge presents grounds for doubt - reason(s) that count against the claim • What effect do challenges have on the game?

  6. Two kinds of defendings • Direct • Indirect • What's the difference? • Direct defendings directly respond to the challenge by providing supporting reasons for the claim. Indirect defendings respond to a challenge by showing that the challenge is misplaced in some way. • What sorts of effects can a defending have on the game?

  7. Two final possible moves • Withdrawals • Retractions • What's the distinction between a withdrawal and a retraction? • A retraction is a reversal of the commitment to defend (generally on the part of the claimant). A withdrawal is the reversal of a challenge (generally on the part of the challenger). • What is the effect of each of these moves on the game?

  8. Exercise We should postpone the picnic. Move: Non-presumptive claim Effect: Starts the discussion Why? Move: bare challenge Effect: Provokes a defending, suspends use of the claim It's going to rain. Move: direct defending Effect: Presents another (embedded) claim How do you know? Move: bare challenge Effect: challenges the direct defense; suspends use of that defense Haven't you seen the weather forecast? Move: indirect defending Effect: Establishes previous claim as presumptive No. If you have, though, it's your call. Move: withdrawal Effect: Challenger gives up his/her challenge; allows the original claim to be used.

  9. Now you try! * Small Group Exercise

  10. The Meno * Small Group Exercise

  11. Socratic Philosophy • Socrates or Plato? • Socrates: 469-399 B.C.E. • Plato: 429-347 B.C.E. • Socrates sentenced to death by Athenians for "crimes" against the state

  12. The Apology • Account of Socrates' trial • Apologia • "A defense especially of one's opinions, position or actions"

More Related