Term
| Naturalistic Explanation of Science |
|
Definition
The idea that science is the explanation of all nature, but in terms of nature. The current view of nature that only matter that is in motion exists, so "science" is the explanation of all matter in motion.
This also follows determinism, which states that all entities are subject to determinism, or the idea that hey can be explained as a function of something else.
ALL IN ALL, naturalistic explanation of science is the idea that science explains what exists (matter in motion), and all of those entities must be subject to explaining as the result of something else(determinism). |
|
|
Term
| 3 major components of something being a science |
|
Definition
It must have:
1) empirical observation, or the idea that what you can observe is in nature
2) Theory, and set to testable proportions. Or the idea that you can take theory about the science and realistically test it out in the world
3) Publicly observable data, or data then when tested out in theory can be reproduced by others using the same method and reviewed by peers |
|
|
Term
| Albert Einstein and Relativity |
|
Definition
| Einstein noticed how time is relative to the speed at which you are moving! He observed a bullet from being stationary and while on a train, and how far the bullet was from the person changed based on being on the train or not. Why was this? Because TIME GOES SLOWER ON THE TRAIN, or time is different due to the speed you are traveling at on the train |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
This theory arose after Einstein discovered the relativity of time. After this had occurred, philosophers realized they could not follow guidelines set by Newton and colleagues anymore, rather that they should rely on empirical observation. In other words, after seeing what Einstein was able to prove, they shifted the thinking of science to ONLY include concrete observational terms. If a scientific theory's terms are based on observational terms, terms we can see, then we can more certain, or "logically positive" that the data is sounds, because it is in terms we already know exist!
THIS is the standard view of science, excluding non observational theory!
ALL in ALL, this is the idea you must set your theories in terms of what we already know for sure, and rely on what we can observe, for it to be considered science |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Popper disagreed with logical positivism in 2 ways. First he felt that theory comes before observation, not the other way around. This is because he argued we need to theorize what we are going to see and looking for before we can see it. (argued that when asking someone to "observe!" they're going to ask, observe what?)
-The second way he disagreed that proving a theory right did not involve concrete answers rather it was "failure to be disconfirmed." he beleived that the best way to prove something right is to not prove it wrong, so he felt making a theory, seeing how it applied, and seeing if it could be critiqued was the best approach to science!
*felt that if you could find a fault, you could find the "solution!" |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Kuhn changed science by proving it was much more subjective than people realize. He did so by arguing that science is based on trying to prove things true, based on whether or not its mind-independent. If something was mind independent, it was considered a truth, BUT what exactly is mind independent then, making the field much more subjective!
He then concluded that sciences are paradigms, or that when all of the professionals in that field follow the one set of beliefs! When scientists accept 1 paradigm, it becomes THE way to analyze subject matter in their field, or becomes the "truths" that science looks to further prove.
*This lead him to conclude the stages of scientific paradigm, which brings about how psychology is looked at as a science |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
This is what was proposed by Thomas Kuhn in regards to science when he proved it was much more subjective than people realized. He stated how when the group of scientists in their field were able to agree on something, it wildly becomes the popular viewpoint of that science. Following that, scientists continue to prove more upon that paradigms truths, until some scientists disbelieve and find another one to follow. He basically came up with the fact that science is based on what other scientists believe it to be true.
*this relates to psychology because it is is the "pre paradigm phase, or the idea that there are competing ideas and paradigms for what is the central one. Once that had been determined, psychology will become a "normal" or "hard" science |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Popper felt that science was based on only what we can physically observe, that it is the idea that we must follow what we know as physical truths. Kuhn believed science was based on essentially which viewpoint is accepted and popular at that time, as scientists will prove it right and that will form the "reality" they explore. Kuhn says truths are relative to paradigms! |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Determinism is the idea that all behavior is the result of something else. Naturalistic explanation of science claims that in order for something to be a science, it must show that it was determined or caused by something else. Determinism basically says nothing happens spontaneously, and there is an explanation for all
*This is broken up into different types! Biological (physiological conditions determine behavior), sociocultural, physical (both nature+nuture), etc. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
He was considered the first philosopher!
-He replaced Supernatural with Natural Explanation, stating that everything could be explained through nature!
-Searched for the one substance that made up everything, AKA the "physis" of our world, and concluded it to be WATER!
-He was able to predict eclipses using geometry, and cornered the olive oil market using weather patterns.
-He was ALSO the first to initiate criticism in his work, or the first to invite his students to criticize his findings and improve on them!
-He also believed in panpsychism, or the idea that everything in matter/ everything physical had a conscious/ soul. He called it "everything is full of Gods"! |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
The physis is the primary element, or primary "stuff" that our world is made up of. Each main philosopher had a different idea of what the physis was
(Thales water, Heraclitus fire, etc) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
This was another ancient greek philosopher.
-He believed that our Physis was not water like Thales said, but instead it breaks down into something even more basic, he called this "the boundless." Which has the possibility of turning into anything, but we as people we not familiar with it
-He Proposed the First Stages of evolution. He felt that hot water and the earth arose fish. Inside of the fish came humans, who were developed into those fish until puberty, where humans could be on their own. He Said DON'T eat fish! Because they were our ancestors
-He felt that the "laws" of nature paralleled laws of human society, but not vice versa!
-used models such as an early map of the Greek World
-Studied fossils to conclude that all life emerged from water! (humans emerged from rough skin of sharks) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| This was the idea all things that are physical also have some sort of conscious. This can be traced back to philosophers like Thales, Plato, or William James |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| This was the physis proposed by Anaximander. Criticizing his teacher Thales, Anaximander proposed that the "physis" that makes up all of life is NOT water, but instead breaks down into something more basic than that. That is called the "boundless" or the "infinite" which makes up everything, and had the possibility of turning into anything! |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Heraclitus was one of the early greek philosophers.
-He believed the "physis" of the world was fire.
-He believed that the world is constantly changing (ie something is not cold, but becoming hotter or colder). Because of this he said "you can' step in the same river twice" meaning once you step in, the river is different
-He felt that because of this, knowledge could not be attained through the physical world. the only things we could know about were undetectable (math, atoms) or supernatural/ideal (mind, soul)
-Even still he was an empiricist, claiming our knowledge comes from the outside, that knowledge just does not include the natural world! |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
This was another of the Greek philosophers.
-His views were the opposite of Heraclitus, as he was a hard RATIONALIST
-Parmenides viewed change as an illusion. He felt the world was definite, finite, concrete, NOT ALWAYS IN MOTION. Therefore, change is what we perceive, and KNOWLEDGE is what our minds make of the world
-His disciple, Zeno of Elea, demonstrated how all change is an illusion. He stated that to get from point A to B, you have to go half the distance first, and half of that distance, and half of that etc. That becomes going an infinite number of points in a finite amount of time, which is impossible, and therefore an illusion!
-Parmenides trusted his THOUGHTS not his senses |
|
|
Term
| What type of psychology does Heraclitus underline with his views. |
|
Definition
| Behaviorism, as Heraclitus thought all knowledge came from our experience (external behaviors) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Heraclitus was an empiricist, believe knowledge came from our environment, where are Parmenides was a rationalist, believed knowledge came from our conscious thought/ ourselves
-Heraclitus trusted his SENSES where as Parmenides trusted his THOUGHTS/REASON
-Heraclitus said everything was always in motion/ constantly changing, where Parmenides said nothing was in constant change, and change is only as our minds perceive it! |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| He was a disciple of Parmenides. He showed how change was an illusion, by showing the Zeno's paradox. If you move from point A to point B, you first have to move half of that, and before that is half of that, and half of that, etc. Therefore, you have to go an infinite number of places in a finite amount of time, and you never ACTUALLY get to point B. This shows how change is an illusion, and provided evidence for Parmenides rationalist philosophy of change and knowledge |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
This was one of the Greek philosophers.
-He felt that physis was NUMBERS, and that life was about harmony and equilibrium. Everything can be expressed mathemetically!
-He DISCOVERED the pythagorean theorem, didn't invent it
-He pointed to irrational numbers and pointed to those as the realm beyond experience!
-He was a DUALIST, considering an abstract and physical world. Our reasoning POWERS allow us to understand the abstract realm dealt with in numbers (our soul could perceive perfect abstract numbers)
-He had a religious cult following, that allowed Women!
-Pythagoras ended up influencing Plato AND the christian faith
-he was a vegetarian, hated maltreatment of animals. coined (you are what you eat)
-His Dualistic universe has both the knowledge is constant in the abstract realm (like Parmenides), and constantly changing in the physical realm (like Heraclitus)
-Because the changing realm is through your senses, and always changing, he felt this GOT IN THE WAY of attaining true abstract knowledge and should be avoided |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
This was one of the Greek Philosophers
-He stated there was no "one Physis," but instead that the world was made up of 4 elements, earth, fire, water, and air.
-He felt there were two powers in the universe, love and strife. Love is a force of attraction that mixes the elements together, and strife is the force that separates the elements
-Believed love and strife drive human behavior as well, like when we seek people vs wanting to be alone
-He started the first theories of perception! every object gives off little copies of itself called "eidola." These eidola then enter the body through the pores, and the heart combines the eidola with the 4 elements in our blood, reconstructing the object. We thus build an inner simulation of the object, the first "mental representation"! |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| These are the tiny copies that objects send out of themselves, proposed by Empedocles. These tiny objects are taken in through our pores, and the object is reconstructed in the heart using the 4 elements in our blood. This gives us a representation of the object in our body, the first mental representation! |
|
|
Term
| First Theory of Mental Representation |
|
Definition
| Empedocles started the first theories of perception! every object gives off little copies of itself called "eidola." These eidola then enter the body through the pores, and the heart combines the eidola with the 4 elements in our blood, reconstructing the object. We thus build an inner simulation of the object, the first "mental representation"! |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
He was the one of the early greek philosophers
-He created Atomism, the first COMPLETELY naturalistic view of the world. He believed that everything in nature was composed of atoms (a-tom = uncuttable unit).
-Even the mind and soul are atoms
-Objects differ due to type, number, location of atoms
-He felt that atoms were unchanging, but the arrangement of them is (which solves the Heraclitus vs Parmenides debate of changing world! |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| It is the idea that the world is made up of one type of material or "stuff." Thales claimed it was the physis (water in his case), where democritus thought it was the atom |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| This is the idea that any phenomenon could be explained if broken down to it's "elements." This explains Democritus's atomism, because he believed that everything could be broken down to atoms and their activity |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| This is the idea of mapping or taking an explanation in one level, and reducing it to another level for that explanation. An example would be Democritus's atomism, which stated that everything could be explained by reducing it to the atomic level |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| All colors are derived from combinations of black, white, red and green (like the trichroatic theory) |
|
|
Term
| Theory of Perception through Atomism |
|
Definition
This was the idea that Democritus agreed with Empedocles with, to an extent. Empedocles felt there was mental representation through the eidola that are shot out from every object and into our pores, which are created through our heart. INSTEAD, Atomism/Democritus felt that atoms entered the body, through one of the 5 sense organs! They are then transferred to the brain, not the heart, and then these atoms make copies of the object from those atoms.
-When the process goes wrong, thats how we get misperception! |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Hippocrates is considered the father of medicine. He was the first to think that all sickness-es were of natural causes, and revolutionized a lot of medicine!
-IN this class, we should know him for his 4 humors. Hippocrates agreed with Empedocles that the body is made up of the 4 elements, earth fire air water, including humans. Hippocrates takes that one step further though, saying that those elements are associated with a humor, a liquid in our body. The earth = black bile, air = yellow bile, fire = blood, water = phlegm. When those humors are unbalanced you get sick!
*Galen took this one step further, stating that each humor corresponds with a temperment/personality type! Water = Phlegm = sluggish/unemotional, fire = blood = cheerful, air = yellow bile = quick tempered/ fiery, earth = black bile = sad! |
|
|
Term
| 4 Elements medicine relation |
|
Definition
Hippocrates agreed with Empedocles that the body is made up of the 4 elements, earth fire air water, including humans. Hippocrates takes that one step further though, saying that those elements are associated with a humor, a liquid in our body. The earth = black bile, air = yellow bile, fire = blood, water = phlegm. When those humors are unbalanced you get sick!
*Galen took this one step further, stating that each humor corresponds with a temperment/personality type! Water = Phlegm = sluggish/unemotional, fire = blood = cheerful, air = yellow bile = quick tempered/ fiery, earth = black bile = sad! |
|
|
Term
| Earth to humor to personality |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| Air to humor to personality |
|
Definition
| Air = yellow bile = fiery/quick tempered |
|
|
Term
| Fire to humor to personality |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| Water to humor to personality |
|
Definition
| Water = phlegm = sluggish/ unemotional |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Sophists were a type of ancient Greek philosopher. They examined human knowledge, They believed that individual experience for knowledge matters, and that "man is the measure of all things."
-They felt that the truth is relative based on an individual and their experiences. There is no "universal truth," only what a group of people believe!
-essentially saying no one is wrong, just the people who can persuade their views the best are right
-modern day sophists are lawyers, "spin doctors" etc |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Socrates was a Greek philosopher, who agreed with the with the sophists in that individual experience matters for knowledge, BUT completely disagreed with how knowledge comes to be. He felt that the truth was NOT relative, and it exists beyond belief/opinion.
-Through this he created the inductive definition, which was the idea of finding the truth or knowledge about something by deriving its essence from other people. By asking many people why different things were "beautiful", finding the similarities gave you the essence for beautiful!
-This became the socratic method, asking questions to let knowledge emerge!
-He was send to execution for corrupting the youth of Athens by having them question virtues of everything |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| This was a notion brought out by Socrates. It is the idea of finding the truth/ knowledge of something by finding its essence! The essence of something was done by asking people why something was "beautiful," and then another thing, and another thing. This was an attempt to find similarities, and find the "essence" of what beautiful is! *knowing why its beautiful is the knowledge. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| This is the idea of attaining knowledge by asking questions! |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Plato was a student of Socrates, and he combines his teachers learnings with the Pythagoreans, who he lived with after Socrates' death.
-He provided the account of WHAT we know (what knowledge is) AND the account of HOW we know (how we get the knowledge
-He created the theory of forms, expanding on the Pythagorean idea that the empirical world could be influenced by the abstract number world. The theory of forms stated that in the abstract realm, there are perfect FORMS of everything, cats, humans, chairs, dogs, etc. Every cat, human, etc we find is just an inferior copy of the abstract form, or "catness" perfect form. Plato then incorporated Socrates teachings by saying that the "essence" that Socrates sought out were the forms in the abstract realm.
-Plato was a rationalist, claiming knowledge had to be acquired through reason
-He felt TRUE KNOWLEDGE comes from discovering forms through rational though.
-He created the Analogy of the Dividend line, which described the levels of knowledge someone could attain. The people who only take in what they experience were the lowest, while those who were able to understand forms, and the inter relatedness between each form, had the highest level of knowledge.
-He created the Allegory of the Cave, which was a story describing the analogy of the divided line
-He created the reminiscence theory of knowledge, stating that all knowledge can be attained only through INTROSPECTION, and we are born with it when our soul enters the body!
-He believed our soul had 3 parts, the rational component but also the courageous and appetitive. He said that bodies have appetites that must be met and a driven by the appetitive, while the courageous soul acts as the one that drives emotions and morality. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Plato created the theory of forms, expanding on the Pythagorean idea that the empirical world could be influenced by the abstract number world. The theory of forms stated that in the abstract realm, there are perfect FORMS of everything, cats, humans, chairs, dogs, etc. Every cat, human, etc we find is just an inferior copy of the abstract form, or "catness" perfect form. Plato then incorporated Socrates teachings by saying that the "essence" that Socrates sought out were the forms in the abstract realm. |
|
|
Term
| The Analogy of the Divided Line |
|
Definition
This was a concept brought out by Plato. He stated that based on the theory of forms, everything we see is an imperfect copy of the perfect form. Our knowledge of the world is a result of much more than our outside world, Plato believed that our rational soul started out in the abstract perfect realm, and then was trapped in the human body. Therefore we already know everything, and we must attain it through introspection! This made Plato believe that those who only used their outside knowledge as doomed to ignorance, claiming that those people only know what they see, and are "imagining" or at best have an opinion on what they see.
-He claimed that knowledge goes from images (what we see), to visible things (seeing worldly relationships, to mathematical concepts(abstract but could be wrong), to Forms (true knowledge), to "The GOOD" which was an understanding of the relationship between the forms!
Overall it went images, visible things, math, forms, the good |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| This was a story created by Plato. It is about people who are chained in a cave, with a fire behind them, and all they see are shadows. People on the wrong side of the divided line only see the shadows, because that is "all they know." When someone breaks out of the chain, and sees the fire and the world around them, they attain "the Good" or the knowledge about the abstract and the perfect forms. But when he comes back to the cave, he tells them about what he sees but nobody believes him, because they only know the shadows (sensory experience) |
|
|
Term
| Reminiscence Theory of Knowledge |
|
Definition
This is a theory created by Plato. It was the idea that our rational soul starts off in the abstract perfect form world. The soul is then trapped in our human body, and becomes overwhelmed with sensory knowledge! The sensory knowledge blinds the soul from the knowledge it had when it entered the body. Therefore, Plato believed all of our knowledge was innate or we were born with it, and we must use introspection, or rationalize with ourselves, to attain this knowledge!
-Using introspection is the way to attain knowledge find the forms of things and true knowledge |
|
|
Term
| Plato's Nature of the Soul |
|
Definition
| Plato believed that everyone had an immortal rational soul, trapped in the human body. He ALSO believed everything had two MORTAL souls that come with your body: the Courageous/emotional soul AND the Appetitive Soul. The Appetitive soul gives us our bodies drives (hunger, thirst, sex), which Plato felt must be suppressed and controlled to give the body room for introspection. The Courageous Soul provides us with our emotions and moral complex (think football player doing it for the RUSH). The rational soul is the immortal one where knowledge lies, and must use introspection to do so. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| This was the highest form of Wisdom in Plato's Analogy of the Divided Line. This was the considered intelligence, because the Good was knowing about Forms of things and how those perfect forms related to one another. Showing inter relatedness of forms was the idea of ultimate knowledge with Plato |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| This is one of Plato's 3 types of souls. The body had all 3 types of souls, with the courageous and appetitive being mortal and the rational immortal. The appetitive soul is the soul that drives our basic human needs, like hunger thrist and sex. We share this soul with animals, and Plato felt it needed to controlled in order to allow the rational soul to go through introspection for knowledge |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| This is one of Plato's 3 types of souls. The body had all 3 types of souls, with the courageous and appetitive being mortal and the rational immortal. The courageous soul is also called the emotional soul, and it drives our humanly emotions. Someone who is courageously driven does things based off of emotion (like a football player knowing the risk, and doing it for the RUSH) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| This is one of Plato's 3 types of souls. The body had all 3 types of souls, with the courageous and appetitive being mortal and the rational immortal. The rational soul is the immortal soul, thought to be originated in the realm of the abstract perfect forms, with all the knowledge of these forms. When it entered the human body, it becomes OVERWHELMED with sensory information, and thus needs introspection in order to get the knowledge back. It constantly argues with the Courageous and Appetitive Soul for dominance, in hopes of being able to introspect and attain knowledge |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
He was one of the Greek Philosophers. He was a student of Plato's, but disagreed with him on many things. Plato felt that knowledge was attained by introspection, independent of nature, but Aristotle felt knowledge and nature were inseperable, and all "esscences"/ forms can be found in nature!
-Aristotle is an EMPIRICIST (did feel we were able to think/rationalize what we see, but the knowledge is IN what we see)
-He felt that EVERYTHING in nature had a purpose, breaking up into a material, formal, efficient, or final cause!
-He felt that there were 3 types of souls (vegetative, sensitive, or rational), and depending on the lifeform your were dictated which kind of soul you have.
-He felt there were 4 levels of understanding of the knowledge that we have, which break down into five senses, common sense, passive reason, and active reason. It breaks down how we use our knowledge
-He felt that our perception was not tiny copies of eidola or atoms (like Empedocles or Democritus), rather the MOVEMENT/MOTION of objects stimulate our senses which go through mediums for our Perception of things
-He believed our memory was based on making associations of other things, based on similarity, contrast, and contiguity |
|
|
Term
| Aristotle's 4 Causes of Matter |
|
Definition
Aristotle believed EVERYTHING in nature had a purpose. Those purposes broke down into 4 causes, which were:
-Material cause (matter in which an object is made EX: a statue made of marble)
-Formal Cause (The particular form the object takes shape EX: the marble takes the form of venus)
-Efficient Cause (this is the force that transforms matter into a certain form EX: energy of the sculptor)
-Final Cause (purpose in which object exists EX sculpture brings people joy)
*He believes everything in matter has these causes, has a function |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| This is one of Aristotle's 4 causes for all objects in nature. An object's material cause is the kind of matter or "material" its made out of (EX statue made of marble) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| This is one of Aristotle's 4 Causes of Matter. It states that an object's formal cause is the form/pattern the object takes. EX the object takes the form of Venus/ a planet |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| This is one of Aristotle's 4 Causes of Matter. It states that an object's efficient cause is the force required to give an object a form EX when the sculptor built the statue, it is the energy he used. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| This is one of Aristotle's four causes for matter. It states that an objects formal cause is the purpose for which the object exists. EX: the sculpture provides pleasure to those who view |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Aristotle, like his teacher Plato, thought there were 3 souls in the world. HOWEVER, he felt everybody had 1 soul instead of 3. The 3 were:
-Vegetative (This is the soul for plants, it allows only growth, assimilation of food, and reproduction
-Sensitive Soul (Soul for animals, it has vegetative functions with a sense to respond to the environment, experience pleasure/pain, and have memory)
-Rational Soul (this is the one for humans. It is immortal, has the functions of the other 2 souls, and allows for thinking/rational thought |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| This is one of Aristotle's 3 souls. It is possessed by plants, and allows growth, assimilation of food, and reproduction |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| This is one of Aristotle's 3 souls. It is possessed by animals, and it has things the vegetative soul has (getting food, growth, reproduction) with also the ability to attain experience, respond to the environment, experience pleasure/pain, and have a memory |
|
|
Term
| Rational Soul (ARISTOTLE) |
|
Definition
| This is one of Aristotle's 3 souls. It is possessed by humans, and it includes the natures of the other 2 souls (vegetative and sensitive), while also having the ability to think and have rational thought. |
|
|
Term
| Aristole's view on Perception |
|
Definition
| Aristotle had views on perception that differed from early philosophers. Unlike Empedocles and Democritus who felt tiny Eidola or atoms entered the body through pores/ sense organs, Aristole felt we attatined information though objects motion/movement and how it affected our sense organs! AKA when smelling, the air moving effects our smell, and it goes through mediums in our body for us to perceive it as a smell! |
|
|
Term
| Aristotle's 4 levels of Reasoning |
|
Definition
Aristotle felt nature/sensory information was vital for knowledge, but it was not sufficient! You had to go further, and rationalize/ think about that information. He thus created the levels of reasoning, which were:
-The 5 senses, our isolated experiences of the sensory info
-Common sense, this is the mechanism that coordinated information from our sense!
-Passive Reason, this was utilizing your synthesized experience from your common sense
-Active reasoning, This was going beyond passive reasoning, and being able to get abstract essences from your experience
(figuring out what "chairness" is) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| This is one of the 4 levels of sense or reasoning for Aristotle. The common sense was the mechanism that brought the sensory information from the 5 senses together |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| This is one of the 4 Aristotle reasoning levels. This is once your experience is synthesized by common sense, USING it in your everyday life |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| This was one of the 4 Aristotle levels of reasoning. This was the final level, by being able to utilize your synthesized experience from the common sense level to attain knowledge of the "essences" from our experiences |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Aristotle believed that Remembering was a spontaneous collection of something that happened in the past. BUT MEMORY is driven by RECALL, which is actively searching for meaningful past experience. This caused him to create the 3 laws of association that drive the Recall process:
-Law of contiguity (we remember things that happened close together)
-Law of similarity (we remember things that were like something else)
-Law of contrast (when we think of things, we can tend to think of the opposite)
All in all, Aristotle felt contiguity (frequency), similarity, and contrast are what drive recall and therefore memory |
|
|
Term
| Aristotle's Material Cause on Behaviorism |
|
Definition
| The material cause was paired with an experiment done by Karl Lashley. He discovered the concept of equipotentiality, or the idea that if any part of the brain is destroyed, the brain's ability to function remains. What he did was test a rat perform a task, while taking out different parts of their brain. He noticed that taking out parts did not stop the rat from doing the task, but the amount took did effect how well it performed. This relates to the material cause, which states the importance of what matter something is made up of. The Lashley experiment showed the brain matter ITSELF has meaning |
|
|
Term
| Aristotle's Efficient Cause on Behaviorism |
|
Definition
| The efficient cause is paired with the findings of Carl Lashley. The efficient cause is the force it took to change an objects form. Hull calculated the "reaction Potential", which he called the probability of a learned response, based on a persons drive and habit strength. It is a calculation for the energy required to do something, which is what the efficient cause is stating! |
|
|
Term
| Aristotle's Formal Cause on Behaviorism |
|
Definition
| The formal cause is paired with Tolman's cognitive mapping theory. The Formal Cause is the form matter takes shape into, and the Tolman Cognitive map is when in your head you map out an area. The process of the cognitive map taking shape shows how the "form" or layout of the map you decide matters (dictates where you think you should go). The formal cause would state that a cognitive maps form matters |
|
|
Term
| Aristotle's Final Cause on Behaviorism |
|
Definition
| Aristotle's final cause relates to B.F. Skinner's operant conditioning theory. Skinner states that all behavior is gear towards pursuing a goal, getting a "reward." This relates to the final cause, in that everything in matter strives towards the final cause, the purpose in life |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The theory of how we attain knowledge |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Descartes said all we know is what we can see. How do we know we're not all in a situation like the Matrix? That's what he asks, saying we only know what we perceive
-How do we know wax is wax after it melts?
-that is our MIND filling in the blank
-He said our senses take in information but they are not enough, and we must RATIONALIZE the rest of it
-He felt we did have a FEW native ideas, beleived in innate knowledge, but also felt a lot of knowledge came from internal rationalizing of brain |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Empiricist, There are NO innate ideas
-He was famous for the clean slate idea.
-he felt the mind is a COMBINER of knowledge that we get from environment
-He said our knowledge has Primary Qualities, or physical properties such as size, shape, solidity, number, motion etc. and secondary qualities, which are ones we perceive (like color, sound, sound taste). The secondary qualities are based on what the perceiver takes in! |
|
|
Term
| George Berkeley Epistemology |
|
Definition
He argued that Locke's view of primary and secondary qualities was wrong, because the primary qualities of objects for knowledge come through our senses!
-Therefore, there are ONLY secondary qualities (which ones are "real"?)
-Argued sense of touch was no different
-Argued ALL that exists in universe is mental experiences
-We THINK theres stuff call matter, we THINK physical properties, but it could be ALL sensations |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Hume agreed with Berkeley in that all that's in life is ideas. He argued though that the BRAIN however is not an active part in the process of combining those ideas. Instead, we are driven by association rules, and how our brain simply takes these ideas we have and puts them together (such as law of contiguity) |
|
|
Term
| Hume's 3 Big influences on Pyschology |
|
Definition
1. Hume's epistemology stated that knowledge is made up of simple laws of association, instead of the mind having an active role making associations for us. PDP models are BASED on applying a few rules to large collection of procession units
2. Hume said that all knowlege therefore is a fact we observe, or a matter or relation among ideas. This relates to Logical Positivism, which was the idea that all knowledge can be broken down into scientific terms!
3. Hume said that there is no such thing as cause and effect, only observations of contiguity between successive events. In other words, something doesn't cause another, we have no idea when something happens will occur, we only assume that based on events in the past! This relates to BF skinner's behaviorism, which stated that behavior is ONLY driven between stimuli, response, reward, punishment, and cognitive/physiology cant CAUSE behavior
OVERALL: HUME gave us PDP models, logical positivism, and BF Skinner Behaviorism |
|
|
Term
| Immanuel Kant Epistemology |
|
Definition
| Kant was a RATIONALIST, who argued against David Hume's idea that knowledge is "habit of thought." Kant suggested that instead of innate ideas, we have innate STRUCTURES/ SYSTEMS for filtering experience and constructing knowledge. ONE of these innate structures is that idea that we make cause and effect relationships, and that is why we see the world in cause and effect. Whether or not cause and effect is real remains to be seen, but Kant argues that is human nature, and because we are all humans with human minds, that is reality! If we all share a structure it becomes human reality |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| He was a member of the Scientific Revolution period. He revolutionized science by Shifting the focus of human behavior from outside to inside. He claimed that you need to go from sensations/perceptions to something deeper for true awareness (and eventually lead to an awareness of God) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| This was the synthesis of Christian Theology/Religion with Aristotle's ideas (knowledge is all throughout nature, obtain it and achieve active reasoning, by using experiences to achieve form knowledge) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| He was the first person to say reason and faith are not compatible. In other words, you could study reasoning without the influence of the religion, and it made studying non religious reasoning respectable! |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| He was the first to say that theres a difference between an objective reality (reality thats the same for everyone), and a perspective reality (reality thats different based on how you perceive it). He was the first to make up John Locke's Primary and Secondary qualities |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Newton brought about the revolution of Deism, or the idea that God created the earth and then left. He felt that this occurred, and his laws of physics explain the world |
|
|
