Daniel Dennett on Reductio ad Absurdum, the Philosopher's Crowbar

Philosopher Daniel Dennett discusses reductio ad absurdum, "the workhorse of philosophical argumentation," wherewith thinkers test the validity of an opponent's argument by taking it to its most illogical extreme.

Daniel Dennett: One of the reasons I wrote this book is because oddly enough, philosophers who are famous -- notorious for being naval gazers, for being reflective.  I think, in fact, philosophers are often remarkably unreflective about their own methodology.  I wanted to draw attention to how philosophers actually go about their business and get them thinking more self-consciously about the tools they use and how they use them.

A tool that everybody should be familiar with and, in fact, people use it all the time is reductio ad absurdum arguments.  It's the sort of general purpose crowbar of rational argument where you take your opponents premises and deduce something absurd from them.  That is, you deduce a contradiction officially.  We use it all the time without paying much attention to it.  If you say something like -- if he gets here in time for supper, he'll have to fly like Superman.

Which is absurd -- nobody can fly that fast.  You don't bother spelling it out, you just say -- you point out that something that somebody imagined or proposed has a ridiculous consequence. Well, let's look at one of the great granddaddy reductio ad absurdum arguments of all times.  And that's Galileo's proof that heavy things don't fall faster than light things leaving friction aside.  He argued as follows.  

Okay, suppose you take the premise that you're gonna show is false.  Suppose heavier things do fall faster than light things.  Now, take a stone A which is heavier than another stone B. That means if we tied B to A with a string, B should act as a drag on A when we drop it because A will fall faster, B will fall slower and so A tied to B should fall slower than A by itself. But A-B tied together is heavier than A by itself so it should fall faster.  It should fall both faster and slower than A by itself.  That's a manifest contradiction.  So we know that our premise with which we began has to be false.  That's a classic reductio ad absurdum.  That's been known and named for several millennia I guess. And, as I say, it's the workhorse of philosophical argumentation.


Directed / Produced by Jonathan Fowler and Elizabeth Rodd

With his new book "Intuition Pumps and Other Tools for Thinking," philosopher Daniel Dennett offers a kind of self-help book for deep thinkers -- a series of thought experiments designed as a workout for the deliberative mind. Here he discusses reductio ad absurdum, "the workhorse of philosophical argumentation," wherewith thinkers test the validity of an opponent's argument by taking it to its most illogical extreme.

Credit: Willrow Hood / 362693204 via Adobe Stock
13-8

The distances between the stars are so vast that they can make your brain melt. Take for example the Voyager 1 probe, which has been traveling at 35,000 miles per hour for more than 40 years and was the first human object to cross into interstellar space. That sounds wonderful except, at its current speed, it will still take another 40,000 years to cross the typical distance between stars.

Worse still, if you are thinking about interstellar travel, nature provides a hard limit on acceleration and speed. As Einstein showed, it's impossible to accelerate any massive object beyond the speed of light. Since the galaxy is more than 100,000 light-years across, if you are traveling at less than light speed, then most interstellar distances would take more than a human lifetime to cross. If the known laws of physics hold, then it seems a galaxy-spanning human civilization is impossible.

Unless of course you can build a warp drive.

Keep reading Show less

Just when the Middle Ages couldn’t get worse, everyone had bunions

The Black Death wasn't the only plague in the 1300s.

By Loyset Liédet - Public Domain, wikimedia commons
Culture & Religion
  • In a unique study, researchers have determined how many people in medieval England had bunions
  • A fashion trend towards pointed toe shoes made the affliction common.
  • Even monks got in on the trend, much to their discomfort later in life.
Keep reading Show less

Pupil size surprisingly linked to differences in intelligence

Maybe eyes really are windows into the soul — or at least into the brain, as a new study finds.

Credit: Adobe stock / Chris Tefme
Surprising Science
  • Researchers find a correlation between pupil size and differences in cognitive ability.
  • The larger the pupil, the higher the intelligence.
  • The explanation for why this happens lies within the brain, but more research is needed.
Keep reading Show less

Lobsters, jellyfish, and the foolish quest for immortality

Being mortal makes life so much sweeter.

Credit: Justin Sullivan via Getty Images
Personal Growth
  • Since the beginning of time, humans have fantasized over and quested for "eternal life."
  • Lobsters and a kind of jellyfish offer us clues about what immortality might look like in the natural world.
  • Evolution does not lend itself easily to longevity, and philosophy might suggest that life is more precious without immortality.
Keep reading Show less
Quantcast