Quarter 1– Module

2.2
Methods of
Philosophizing
METHODS OF PHILOSOPHIZING

1. The Dialectic Method

• This method of philosophizing was conceived by
the Greek philosopher Socrates, (born 470 BCE)
one of the great philosophers of the ancient
world.
• Socrates aim was to achieve what he called the
good life which is based on the proper care of
one’s soul (psyche in Greek).
• The soul, according to Socrates, can be properly
taken care of if we make it as good as possible
(Stumpf 2008). Since by its very nature the soul’s
activity is to know, the soul can only be good if we
employ it in the activity of having a clear
awareness of the meaning of some words (Stumpf
2008).
• The method starts with eliciting the definition of a certain word from
a person who appears to be familiar (or “pretends” to be familiar)
with its meaning. Socrates then points out the imperfections of the
understanding of the person through a series of questions. What
Socrates desires is for the person to realize his ignorance and
contradictions, and thereby correcting his own mistakes and arriving
at a complete knowledge of the true meaning of the word.
George Wilhelm Hegel
• German philosopher and an idealist.
• The Socratic Method was modernized and treated
in a different way by Hegel.
• He believed that the ideas of the human minds
have access of what the world is like.
• People are social beings and could be completely
influenced by other people’s ideas. An individual’s
mind is influenced by means of a common
language, customs of one’s society, and the
cultural institutions that one belongs to.
• Hegel refers this to “Spirit” as the collective
consciousness of a society which is responsible for
honing one’s consciousness and ideas.
• Hegel also believed that the Spirit is constantly changing and
evolving. According to Hegel, the spirit changes through
dialectic.

First, there is an idea about the world (much like a thesis),

which has a natural characteristic of having errors which give
rise to the antithesis. The thesis and antithesis can be
eventually resolved by creating a synthesis which is a new idea
comprised of the essentials of both the thesis and the
antithesis.
2. The Pragmatic Method
• Initiated by the evolutionary thoughts of Hegel and
Darwin in 19th century America.
• Started by Charles S. Pierce (1839-1914), popularized
by William James (1842-1910) and Institutionalized in
American culture by John Dewey (1859-1952).
• According to the pragmatists, philosophy seems to
offer a set of beliefs about human beings and his
relationship to the world. Pragmatists offer no such
beliefs.
• Seek to make philosophy relevant by solving real life
problems.
• Aims to test the dogma of science, religion and
philosophy by determining their practical results.
• The pragmatic test is: “If I practice this belief, will it
bring success or failure? Will I solve problems or
create problems?” Successful experience is the
verification process of truth for the pragmatists
3. The Phenomenological Method
• Was conceived by Edmund Husserl (born in 1859),
one of the greatest intellects of the 19th century.
• Husserl himself was impressed by the achievements
of science. Unfortunately, according to Husserl,
science brings a certain attitude which is counter
productive to the human soul: the naturalistic
attitude (or simply naturalism).
• Naturalism in this context is the idea that
everything can be explained in terms of matter or
the physical. Since man is not only physical (i.e.
body) but also spiritual, this naturalistic attitude
brings a distorted view of man by banishing the
spiritual from the world which includes the
banishment of ideas, values, and cultures (Husserl,
1965).
• To counter the naturalistic tendency, Husserl returned to the idea of the
thinking self which was given pre-eminence by the 17th century French
philosopher, Rene Descartes. More specifically, the layman’s term
given to the thinking self is “one’s immediate experience.”
• Husserl’s main purpose was to build a philosophy free from any biases
or preconceived ideas. One can only do this if one returns to immediate
experience. Husserl said that he was only looking to “things and facts
themselves, as these are given in actual experience and intuition”.
This experience is not the objective world of science separate from us,
but the world as it appears to us or (borrowing the term of the 18th
century German philosopher Immanuel Kant) the phenomenal world -
hence, the term phenomenology.
• However, our beliefs about human beings and the world prevent us
from seeing clearly this immediate experience which he calls “pure
subjectivity”.
• Thus, to know the truth, we have to put aside one by one all our
limiting beliefs about the world which represents our biases. Husserl
calls this process phenomenological epoche (epoche is the Greek
word for bracketing). Bracketing is not ignoring. It is an act of
stepping back at our biases and prejudices to make sure that they
do not influence the way we think. Only facts provided by
immediate experience must influence us.
 4. The Primary and Secondary reflections
• Another influential intellectual movement which had its roots in the 19th
century ideas of Søren Kierkegaard (1813-1855) and Friedrich Nietzsche
(1844-1900) was existentialism.
• Kierkegaard was religious and Nietzsche was atheistic (atheism is the
denial of the supernatural), they both grounded their philosophy on the
personal choices of the individual which becomes one of the important
tenets of existentialism.
• Jean-Paul Sartre (1905-1980) and his partner, Simone de Beauvoir
(1908-1986) popularized atheistic existentialism while Gabriel Marcel
(1889-1973) and Karl Jaspers (1883-1969) promoted religious
existentialism.
• Religious existentialists saw certain parallels between existential ideas
and religious themes like the fall of Adam and Eve which can be
compared to the theme of inauthentic existence in existentialist
philosophy(Stumpf2008).
-After that brief overview on existentialism, let us
focus our attention on one existentialist method
identified by Gabriel Marcel: the primary/ secondary
reflection.

For Marcel, reflection is not just a disinterested

look at experience. It emerged when something
valuable is at stake. Marcel gave an example of a
watch. Suppose you try to take a watch from your
pocket. To your surprise, the watch that you expect to
be there is not there. A break from your ordinary
routine happened.
 From this break, reflection appears in the form of a question:
Where is my watch? Then, a host of questions, connected to the first
one, followed: Where was the last time I’ve seen my watch? Was
there a hole in my pocket? You try to retrace your steps from this
moment back to the time when you last saw your watch.
From this example, you will see that reflection arise when there is
a disruption from your normal routine and when something valuable
is at stake. Then, Marcel identified two levels of reflection: primary
reflection and secondary reflection. Marcel applied these two levels
of reflection to the most fundamental question: “Who am I?”
 Nowadays, we try to answer this question by filling up a form given
by our school for example. The form asked us to write our name, age,
gender, address, name of parents, etc. To answer this, of course we
have to think to distinguish who we are (the self) against other things
(the non-self or objects). This is the primary reflection.
Yet, we had an uneasy feeling that all the information we put on
the form (although true) do not fully capture who we really are
(Marcel 1970). We view that our self is bigger and more expansive
than what is there on the form. Thus, we are not merely thinking but
we are thinking about thinking and about the process we perform in
answering the form.
This is the secondary reflection. The result of secondary reflection is a
more expansive view of the self until it embraces the world. Thus, the
separation of the self and the world brought about by primary
reflection were united by the secondary reflection.
5. The Analytic Method

 Another reaction to the Hegelian system building philosophy is the

analytic approach initiated by philosophers at Cambridge University
(England): George Edward Moore (1873-1958), Bertrand Russell (1872-
1970) and Ludwig Wittgenstein (1889-1951).
 The task of analytic approach is not to create another system of ideas
to counter the Hegelian system but to clarify how philosophers used
words through an analysis of language (Stumpf 2008).
 Wittgenstein said that ‘the object of philosophy is the logical
clarification of thought’ so that ‘the result of philosophy is not a number of
philosophical propositions, but to make propositions clear”.
 Analytic philosophers employed various methods of linguistic analysis
such as the principle of verification and logical analysis (Rudolf Carnap).
What we are going to use is the method of Wittgenstein.
We can divide Wittgenstein’s philosophy in to the earlier
Wittgenstein and the latter (or the new) Wittgenstein.
The earlier Wittgenstein followed the idea of his
mentor and close friend Bertrand Russell who view
language in only one way: stating facts. Wittgenstein’s
first book (the only one published during his lifetime)
Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus (1919) reflected this idea.
However he soon realized that words had multiple
functions depending on the context to which it occurs.
Wittgenstein used the analogy of “tools in a tool box”
(Wittgenstein 1968). If we look at the tools inside a tool
box ‘there is a hammer, pliers, a saw, a screw driver, a
ruler, a glue pot, glue nails and screw. The functions of
words is as diverse as the functions of these objects’
(quoted by Stumpf 2008).
 What Wittgenstein wants is to analyze language in the way actual
people used it in ordinary situations and not to construct an ideal
language based on logic and mathematics like what Russell seems to
be doing.
To analyze language, we have to realize that it follows rules. If there
are rules in every aspect of life, there are certainly rules on how we
put together and communicate words.
Wittgenstein believed that these rules are like the rules of games
(Wittgenstein 1968)-language games.
For example, the usage of words like “demand”, “supply”,
“money”, “price” in the context of economics differ from its usage in
everyday life. These are technical words and they follow certain rules
(i.e. the language game) within that discipline that affects the way
these words are used.
Different Fallacies
 Fallacies are the arguments somehow could sound
convincing and be very persuasive in order to shape others
opinion and deliver flawed judgment and reason.
 Fallacy Example
Short Description

1. Argumentum Hominem came from Latin “How can we believe him

ad word “homo” which means when he talks about
Hominem man. This fallacy literally social distancing, he is a
means hitting the person lawyer who is a liar.”
“Attacking the below the belt instead of
Person” focusing on the issue at hand.

2. Argumentum Baculum is a Latin word “TV Patrol is the best

ad which means scepter or stick. news program on TV. If
Baculum A sceptre is a symbol of you don’t believe me, I
authority. Normally it is the won’t let you watch the
(Appeal to Force) Pope who carries it in his TV.”
hands. This is committed
when a person uses threat or
force to advance an
argument.
3. Argumentum ad Misercordiam came from “Forgive me officer, there
Misercordiam Latin word Misericordia are lot of boarders in this
which means pity or apartment including
(Appeal to Pity) compassion. A person myself. Only the owner
uses emotion such as was issued a quarantine
pity to convince pass. We don’t have
someone food, we can’t give our
ATM to the owner. That’s
why I went out. So I did
not violate the
Bayanihan Act Heal as
One.”
4. Argumentum ad Populum is the Latin word “I’m sure you want to
Populum for people. Most of TV have an Iphone. Almost
commercials are guilty of 80% of your schoolmates
“Appeal to people”/
this argument which are using it.” 
Bandwagon fallacy
exploit people’s vanity,
desires, etc. 
5. Argumentum ad Tradition means All of us in the family,
Tradition tradition. from our ancestors up to
Advancing an idea since now, are devout
“Appeal to Tradition” it has been practice for Catholics, so it is only
a long time. right that you will be
baptized as a Catholic.

6. Argumentum and Ignorantiam a Latin According to Zecharia

Ignorantiam word for ignorance. Sitchin, the author of
Whatever has been the
“Appeal to Ignorance” proven false must be book “Cosmic Code,
true and vice “Adam was the first test
versa tube baby. Since nobody
proves otherwise,
therefore it is true.”
 7. Petitio According to Merriam “God exists because the
Principii Webster’s dictionary it is a Bible says so. The Bible is
fallacy in which a conclusion inspired. Therefore we know
(Begging the is taken for granted in the that God Exists.”
Question) premises. Also
called-“circular argument.”
8. Hasty This fallacy is committed Our neighbor who is a
Generalization when one reaches a police officer was convicted
generalization based on of being a drug dealer,
insufficient evidence therefore, all police officers
are drug dealers.
9. Cause and Assuming that the effect is “My teacher didn’t collect
Effect related to a cause because the homework two weeks in
both events occur one after a row when my friend was
the other. absent. Therefore, my
friend being absent is the
reason why my teacher
doesn’t collect the
homework.”
10. Fallacy of Infers that something “You are a doctor,
Composition is true of a part, is therefore you came
true of a whole from a family of
doctors.”

11. Fallacy of Division Infers that something “Your family is smart,

is true of the whole, therefore you are
must also be true on smart.”
its parts

12. Fallacy of Using the same term “Humans walk by

Equivocation in a different situation their
with different legs. The table has
meaning. legs.
Therefore the table
walks by its legs.”