学术独立的价值

Loading...

Del curso dictado por The University of Edinburgh

哲学导论（中文版）

166 calificaciones

The University of Edinburgh

哲学导论（中文版）

166 calificaciones

本课程将为你介绍现代哲学中的一些研究领域。在每个模块中，将由不同的哲学家为你讲述其专业领域内最重要的疑问和问题。首先，我们来了解什么是哲学，哲学有哪些独特的目标与方法以及哲学与其他学科有何不同？之后，我们会在课程剩余的时间内向你简要介绍各种哲学领域的总体情况。你要学习的主题包括：知识论，其中将讨论囊括我们对世界和我们自身的了解以及如何获取这些知识；科学哲学，我们将在此模块中调查科学研究和实践中的基础概念问题；心灵哲学，我们将在此模块中询问物质拥有心灵的意义以及应如何理解和诠释心灵；道德哲学，我们将在此模块中探究道德判断和反应的本质，看它们是旨在得出客观的道德真相，还是仅作为个人或文化偏好，以及，形而上学，我们将在此模块中思考有关事实本质的一些基础概念问题。本慕课 (MOOC) 课程由爱丁堡大学 Eidyn 研究中心领导设计。为配合“哲学导论”的授课，我们为大家倾力推荐一本由 Routledge 出版社出版的名为 "Philosophy for Everyone" 的配套书籍。这本“哲学导论”的课程配套书籍是由爱丁堡大学哲学小组为满足慕课 (MOOC) 学生要求而编写的。"Philosophy for Everyone"一书中包含清晰易懂的章节、章节摘要、词汇表、探究问题、补充阅读推荐以及在线资源指南。 This is a translated version. To join the original English version, Please visit this page https://www.coursera.org/learn/philosophy

De la lección

你应该相信你听到的东西吗？- Allan Hazlett

我们对周围世界的理解大多基于他人的观点。难道这意味着我们相信他人的证词是有依据的吗？在本模块中，我们将探讨两位伟大的苏格兰启蒙哲学家对这个问题的解答，他们分别是大卫·休谟 (1711 - 1776) 和托马斯·里德 (1710 - 1796)。休谟和里德在证词方面存在的争议代表了两种世界观之间的冲突，而这种冲突将会延续数百年：一种是怀疑且通常是世俗的世界观，总是对一切持怀疑态度（以休谟为代表），一种是保守且通常是宗教的世界观，以捍卫常识为己任（以里德为代表）。

简介：休谟关于证词和奇迹的观点8:48

里德对休谟的反驳2:13

里德的主张5:39

康德、启蒙运动以及学术独立4:16

学术独立的价值3:57

Conoce a los instructores

Dr. Dave Ward
Lecturer in Philosophy
University of Edinburgh
Professor Duncan Pritchard
Professor of Philosophy
University of Edinburgh
Professor Michela Massimi
Full Professor
Philosophy
Dr. Suilin Lavelle
Lecturer in Philosophy
University of Edinburgh
Dr. Matthew Chrisman
Reader in Philosophy
Philosophy
Dr. Allan Hazlett
Dr. Alasdair Richmond
Dr.
Philosophy

So who's got the right picture?

Human Kant with their ideal of intellectual autonomy, or

Reed with his idea of intellectual solidarity?

This just brings up the question of the value of intellectual autonomy, so

why think that it's valuable, or a good thing, to be intellectually autonomous?

So, let's look at some of the ways that human Kant might answer that question.

Two interesting things they might say.

The first is based on that Latin motto that Kant appeals to, Sapere aude,

which means literally dare to be wise.

But, a little bit less you can literally, you could translate it dare to know.

So, if we follow that,

slightly less literal translation Kant's suggestion that a person who's beliefs and

opinions are based on testimony doesn't really have knowledge.

She doesn't really know the stuff that she basis on testimony.

So when he asks us to dare to know,

he's saying, dare to base our beliefs on something other than testimony,

because that's the only way we're going to have knowledge.

So you might think that sounds completely wrong.

Obviously, you can know stuff on the basis of testimony.

So imagine an old friend calls you up and says she's in town for the weekend.

You now know that she's in town for the weekend,

so there's obviously a sense in which you can get knowledge through testimony.

There's a philosophical tradition that goes back to Plato on which genuine or

real knowledge requires something more.

Requires what Plato called the ability to give an account.

So the ability to explain or

to situate that knowledge in some broader body of information.

And that's something you might think, you can't really get from testimony.

That kind of understanding or as Kont might put it,

wisdom can only be gotten on your own.

You can't get it from someone else.

So think of the difference here between someone whose beliefs about the Star ferry

in Hong Kong or

based about on only reading a Wikipedia article about the Star ferry.

Where as someone who lived in Hong Kong their whole live and

rides the Star ferry every day.

So there is a very real sense in which you might want to say

the person who has ridden the Star ferry and

lives in Hong Kong knows the Star ferry in a way the person who has

merely read about it on Wikipedia does not really know anything at all.

She doesn't really have genuine or real knowledge.

So if we go with that thought,

we're going to be able to explain the value of intellectual autonomy.

The intellectually autonomous person is going to be the only person who's in

the market for getting knowledge, or understanding, or wisdom, or

whatever you like.

So the second way you might go about defending intellectual autonomy

is by appeal to some social and political considerations.

So if you think about our policy or trusting other people's testimony,

one thing to keep in mind about it is that it has certain conservative implications.

So people have a tendency to let their opinions be shaped

by their communities to believe what people around them to believe.

And in particular think about the extent to which people have a tendency to have

their opinions shaped by the community that they grow up in.

People tend to believe, what their parents tell them, or

what other people in their community tell them.

And this means that we tend to inherit our religious and our political, and

our moral views from previous generations, or from people around us.

So one way of putting the question about the value of intellectual autonomy is to

ask about the value of this tendency.

Are we fans of this tendency, do we like it?

Or are we more skeptical of it?

Reed, given his views about the naturalness of trusting human testimony,

is necessarily going to be a fan of this tendency to inherit views

from one's community.

Whereas Hume, being skeptical of the force of human testimony

is not going to be nearly as much of a fan.

So how do we answer this question,

well how you ask this question is going to depend and

how you feel about conservatism and intellectual matters.

So if you value progressive and innovative breaks with tradition and

rejecting conventional wisdom, new ideas over throwing the old ideas

you're going to side with Hume and Kant and the fans of intellectual autonomy.

Whereas if you value tradition and the conservation of community beliefs,

you're going to side with Reed and the fans of intellectual solidarity.

So in any event, these are the issues, I think, that are at stake when we ask this

question about the extent to which we should trust other people's testimony.

Explora nuestro catálogo

Inscríbete de manera gratuita y obtén recomendaciones personalizadas, actualizaciones y ofertas.

Coursera brinda acceso universal a la mejor educación del mundo, al asociarse con las mejores universidades y organizaciones, para ofrecer cursos en línea.

© 2019 Coursera Inc. Todos los derechos reservados.

Descargar en la App Store

Consíguelo en Google Play