4 6 522
P h i l o s o p h i c a l R e a s o n i n g
It is not easy to explain the character of philosophical reasoning. One source of con-
fusion is that philosophers reason in very different ways. They use diverse methods
to explore diverse topics. In addition, philosophers reason about reasoning, and they
often disagree about what counts as proper reasoning. As a result, the nature of
philosophical reasoning is itself a philosophical problem. This chapter, then, can-
not cover all of philosophical reasoning. Instead, we will focus on one example—
free will—that brings together many features that are central to much philosophical
reasoning.We can acquire some sense of philosophical reasoning by contrasting it with
reasoning in other areas. Reasoning in religion usually takes for granted
that certain scriptures and leaders have special authority. Premises in reli-
gious reasoning can then cite what is said in those texts or by those people.
Similarly, reasoning in law usually assumes that certain institutions (such as
legislatures and courts) as well as texts (such as constitutions, statutes, and
opinions in precedents) have special authority and can serve as the basis for
legal reasoning. Moreover, this book has often emphasized that, in everyday
discussions, much is taken for granted and left unsaid. In general, there is no
need to state points that are already a matter of agreement.
In contrast, philosophers usually try to make underlying assumptions
explicit and then subject them to critical examination. All premises and
presuppositions should be brought into the light of day, so that we can ask
what exactly they mean and whether we ought to accept them. No author-
ity may be taken for granted without support. No assumption is sacrosanct,
even the assumption that no assumption is sacrosanct, according to most
philosophers.
Nonetheless, even for the philosopher, something must trigger an interest
in a particular underlying assumption. This usually arises when the advance
of knowledge creates fundamental conflicts within the system of hitherto
accepted assumptions or so-called common sense. Thus, much that counts
as modern philosophy is an attempt to come to terms with the relationship
between modern science and the traditional conception of humankind’s
place in the universe. Conflicts between science and common sense feed97364_ch22_ptg01_465-494.indd 465 15/11/13 12:14 3M
some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materiallyCopyright 201^3 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights,
affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.