The Fixation of Belief - Charles Peirce
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 8 มิ.ย. 2024
- This video is an overview of Charles S. Peirce's "The Fixation of Belief".
You can find a copy of the essay here:
1. Fixation of Belief: oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl20...
2. Fixation of Belief: arisbe.sitehost.iu.edu/menu/l...
3. You can find it in The Essential Peirce (amazon affiliate link): amzn.to/2PNqp7M
4. The Fixation of Belief is also in Writings of Charles S. Peirce: A Chronological Edition, Volume 3: 1872-1878 (amazon affiliate link): amzn.to/2QTqA1T
** FURTHER MATERIAL **
* For more of Peirce's published papers, see here: peirce.iupui.edu/resources.html
* My American Philosophy Videos Playlist: • American Philosophy
** About Me **
* SUBSCRIBE to my channel for more videos: goo.gl/ukVPLo
* Become a member of my channel for members-only videos on Peirce, American Philosophy, Metaphysics, and more: / @logicphilosophy
*** RESOURCES FOR VIDEO ***
- Hitler's reign of terror: www.loc.gov/item/mbrs00017393/
- The Horror of it all (clip from dr, jekyll)
- Felton Art Studio, Bdf Films, and Miscellaneous Collection. W.S.S. Thriftettes. [United States: BDF Films, 1918] Video. www.loc.gov/item/00694021/.
- AWOL clip. Bowers, Charles R., Animation, American Motion Picture Corporation, and Afi/Rhode Island Historical Society Collection. AWOL, all wrong old Laddiebuck. [United States: American Motion Picture Co, 1919] Video. www.loc.gov/item/00694022/.
- The arm behind the army. United States War Department, and U.S. Government Films Collection. The arm behind the Army. [United States: U.S. War Department, 1943] Video. www.loc.gov/item/2001642592/.
- The Fighting American. Universal Pictures, Frank Kingsley, and Carl Laemmle. The Fighting American. 1924. Video. www.loc.gov/item/mbrs01190585/.
- Genthe, Arnold, photographer. Pavlova, Anna, Madame. , 1915. Nov. 8. Photograph. www.loc.gov/item/2018708734/.
- Pathé Frères, and U.S Pathé Frères. Liliputian Dance. United States: Pathé Frères, 1906. Video. www.loc.gov/item/2006640665/.
- American flag. Harris & Ewing, photographer. American Flag. United States United States, 1923. [April] Photograph. www.loc.gov/item/2016892264/.
- Vitagraph Company Of America, Inc Thomas A. Edison, and Paper Print Collection. Congress of Nations. United States: Edison Manufacturing Co, 1900. Video. www.loc.gov/item/00694181/.
- Thomas A. Edison, Inc, and Paper Print Collection. Uncle Josh's nightmare. United States: Edison Manufacturing Co, 1900. Video. www.loc.gov/item/00694326/.
- Bitzer, G. W., Camera, American Mutoscope And Biograph Company, and Paper Print Collection. Expert Bag Punching. United States: American Mutoscope and Biograph Company, 1903. Video. www.loc.gov/item/96519760/.
- Science Service. , 1924. Photograph. www.loc.gov/item/2016836961/.
- Science Service. , 1924. Photograph. www.loc.gov/item/2016836962/.
- Federal Art Project, Sponsor. Museum of Science & Industry / Galic. Chicago Illinois, None. [Chicago: illinois wpa art project, between 1936 and 1940] Photograph. www.loc.gov/item/98510059/.
- Weisberg, Shari, Artist. Keeping up with science / Shari. , None. [Ill.: federal art project, wpa, between 1936 and 1939] Photograph. www.loc.gov/item/98518267/.
- Hoke, George Wilson, Writing, Inc Eastman Teaching Films, and Inc Encyclopaedia Britannica Films. The Living Cell. [United States: Eastman Teaching Films, Inc., 1929 ; United States: Encyclopædia Britannica Films, Inc, 1945] Video. www.loc.gov/item/fia54000311/.
- Hoke, George Wilson, Writing, Inc Eastman Teaching Films, and Inc Encyclopaedia Britannica Films. The Living Cell. [United States: Eastman Teaching Films, Inc., 1929 ; United States: Encyclopædia Britannica Films, Inc, 1945] Video. www.loc.gov/item/fia54000311/.
![Charles S. Peirce - Fixation of Belief [Philosophy Audiobook]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/gJAGMWZ3YQU/mqdefault.jpg)
I am a philosophy professor and I specialize in pragmatism and this was an extremely well done video! It was a great refresher for me as I am heading in to teach these articles myself. Thank you for posting them.
Thanks a lot for the positive feedback. I made the video during the pandemic and used the video as a way to introduce the essay before we read it for class. I hope it works to give a general idea of what the essay is about before one dives into the details! Best wishes!
I read this one in 1986. I was only 18 years old and this essay had a huge impact on me. I think Peirce would be glad to see your video. Regards, from Argentina
Excellen work. Thank you for bringing this excellent essay from Peirce to my attention.
Great video! I had to read fixation of belief for a class and this is the only way I really understood it. I loved the timely examples of social distancing and think this essay is fascinating given we are living in a supposedly 'post-truth' world, maybe driven by people tenaciously sticking to their false beliefs.
Glad it was useful! It is worthwhile to read the essay since the video definitely isn't exhaustive. Even if we are in a "post-truth" world, I'm assuming people want to avoid doubt due to its discomfort and, in their more reflective moments, might wonder about what method they ought to use to fix their belief! Thanks for the comment!
Interesting, that despite a best method least preferred methods useful in specific situations
Oh my gosh. Wish this was around when I had to read this for class the first time! I had a really tough time understanding Peirce and his excessive "fluffy" language. This is so helpful!!!
Glad it was helpful! One funny thing about Peirce is that sometimes he indicates that he is going to make an idea "clear", but by "clear", he doesn't mean that it is easier to understand! He tends to mean that he is going to make the idea "more precise" or tied to some precise experimental result. Personally, whenever I see this, I say to myself "Ah! now I will understand what he means" but end up saying "oh, I don't follow this at all!" Best wishes!
The fluffy language was/is very useful for expressing multiple ideas and sentiments with a single sentence.
@@astrobullivant5908 Terms used in language can be univocal, equivocal, and analogical. The benefit of a univocal term is that its meaning signifies only 1 concept. Technical terms such as in medicine like "sternocleidomastoid" aren't used equivocally or analogically, which means that there is absolutely no ambiguity over what is being referred to when using that term. Agreed that at first encounter, this might be an intimidating word, but the assimilation of a new word upon which we can't rely on analogy yields great communicative advantages on the long term.
With the example I just gave, the etymology of the word "sternocleidomastoid" gives us a great clue as to what is being referred to: a breast-like muscle linking the sternum and clavicle. Luckily for us, Peirce is very careful etymologically. So even daunting words can be deciphered using etymological intuition. His preferred spelling of "semeiotics" (as opposed to semiotics) is a great testament to this, since the "semi-" prefix has Latin origins meaning "half" or "partial" , which has nothing to do with the discipline of the study of the meaning of signs.
Great lecture! Very well explained.
Many thanks!
I didn't read the fixation of belief so I will rely on the method of authority and believe what you said.
Ha! If that is the case, then I COMMAND YOU to read the essay!
The suggestion of reflexivity of the scientific method also reminds me of later innovations - first Godel's method of feeding the rules of formal systems back into the system itself - leading to contradictions or incompleteness, but also Bartley's Pancritical rationalism that examines the infinite regress of justification and suggests abandoning foundationalism altogether, shifting the burden elsewhere.
I wish this was here when I first started reading Peirce! Great explanation!
Thank you! Peirce is a really fun philosopher to read since he is interested in so many things!
10x better than my professor! Thanks a bunch.
Ohhh! Thanks. Glad I could be of some help. While it is one of Peirce's simpler essays, I've never found any of Peirce's writings "an easy read". Good luck!
Amazing explanation thank you so much!
Thanks I appreciate it!
Great video.
The example about a coconut tree and a shark I think is rather interesting for me. I know it is a hypothetical example, but I guess most people visualize it as having a shark swimming right next to you and a coconut next to where you are standing. Not whether the chances of being eaten by a shark is more probable or being, I don't know what, by a coconut tree. Most people, unless you are from the tropics, probably don't know it is not a good idea to be standing right next to a coconut tree. And if you are from the tropics, you can probably judge if a particular coconut tree is dangerous to be standing next to. I certainly don't care very much standing next to a dwarf species of coconut tree. There are tons of them in the tropics as well, not just the very tall coconut trees that are stereotypical coconut trees in North America, for instance. Then again, there are shark species that are not dangerous or too small to be dangerous.
Yup, nothing is easy to pin down. That is why philosophy of mind is so fun.
I believe the scientific method suffers the same problem as the a priori method.
The former can also be upset by a hard fact that renders a previously known fact to be false. Also, it seems like one can know something with certainty, given the a priori method (e.g., a theoretical demonstration), but not with the scientific method.
Knowledge is justified belief, it comes from replicated certainty which is available through logic and science.
Dewey calls this Warranted Assertibility
@@Sazi_de_Afrikan Thank you. I independently derive most of my philosophy but it's always nice to know where/how to tie in to the history of it.
I wonder why you even bothered to watch the video? You already made up your mind, it seems.
@@galek75 @korean shinebox Do you presume that everyone who watches the video must first be ignorant of the subject?
Thanks. Very helpful.
You are very welcome!
Great explanation! I find Peirce's illustration of the method of science the weakest of the four. Anyway, his trial to look at inquiry methods more from an 'ethical' than an 'epistemological' standpoint is truly fascinating
Agreed! The method of science explanation in "the Fixation" isn't well-explained other than positing some features like the fundamental hypothesis of reality. However, CSP expands on the method of science in subsequent articles in the Illustration series. Best wishes!
You asked for examples of a priori method at work how about the belief that the potential downside of taking the covid vaccine is greater than the potential downside of catching covid.
Very helpful!
Many thanks! Glad you enjoyed the video!
I guess an example of the a priori method would be a belief in Classical Foundationalism (CF) as opposed to moderate, fallible foundationalism, or some other system of justification. Cartesian CF is said to be founded on ideas or objects of thought that can only be provided by "within". So the fact of cognitive misfires from behavioral neuroscience would be ignored by the Cartesian because this wouldn't be an undercutting defeater for her fixated belief of something thinking.
Ya. I think the idea that there must be some type of ultimate foundational belief (some indubitable) or axiom that all beliefs are justified in terms of seems like a belief fixed by the a priori method. Nice one!
@@LogicPhilosophy To expand, I think the method of reasons or a priori method is one that is used to ease dialectical tension. But, as Dewey might say, dialectical satisfaction does not actually mean we have gotten closer to the knowledge object. "Reasons", following from their Kantian influence, don't SHOW how the idea in question is true or false.
I can have the most air-tight deductive argument, but if I have not done some type of empirical inquiry, all I've done is make myself feel better ABOUT the knowledge object instead of looking to obtain it.
Selection is a default. Nature eliminates the inadequate. The fittest at a time could be too specialized to survive change.
The a priori method seems somewhat difficult to understand to me. I wonder if it would be fair to roughly characterize the difference between it and the scientific method by the types of information they use? It seems to me that the a priori method employs existing, previously acquired information whereas the scientific method requires new information gathered expressly for the purpose of fixating (or is it fixing?) the belief being investigated.
I like this distinction and there does seem some truth to it. Whenever I think of the a priori method I tend to think of a commitment to beliefs due to certain basic principles that just seem right to us. This can obviously vary, as Peirce notes, since he likens beliefs fixed by this method as akin to those fixed by taste / fashion. So, while one generation may firmly hold to the idea that all biological wholes (or complex entities) can ultimately be calculated from the behavior of their parts, the next may believe that the behavior of these wholes cannot. Maybe certain political beliefs might fall into this category as well or what is important in education.
@@LogicPhilosophy I think part of my confusion might be due to the term 'a priori'. As I understand 'a priori' is often used to refer to something that is independent
of experience or empirical evidence but to me it also seems that the 'basic principles that just seem right to us' are really just the aggregation of our past experiences with the world and other people. Thus the a priori method 'employing existing information', as I wrote previously, would just kind of generalize the thought of past experiences a bit further.
This leads me to wonder if theoretical physics could be thought of as successfully using the a priori method. I'm not a scientist myself but I think part of theoretical physics is coming up with new models to better explain existing data.
The link to the text is dead. 404 :(
Thanks for letting me know. I updated the links.
what is a habit pls
A simple definition is that it is a disposition to act in a certain way in certain situations. Example 1. I have a habit of getting annoyed when I see people being rude to cashiers. Example 2. My skin has a habit of having little bumps when I get cold. Brrr
3
Regarding a priori method: Pierce says or mind acts "in step with the intellectual fashions of the time" to resolve doubt. I think recent events might shine some light on this. During the early days of the pandemic many people in North America were not wearing masks. Some may have reached the belief that masks are ineffectual by either authority, they were told not to wear the, or they may have reached this conclusion by thinking about it for a while. Im thinking of it as things that many people disagree on these days. Another example: whether we should address non-binary people with gender neutral pronouns. To answer this I think many people are using their own thoughts on the matter. (and in some cases the method of tenacity).
Interesting examples. I'd be interested to know more of your thoughts on how people came to the conclusion not to wear a mask based on the a priori method. I would imagine that people might come to the opposite conclusion. Reasoning something like "ah, there is a virus out there, if I put this cloth over my face, it will keep the virus from getting me". So, they would come to the belief regardless of any experimentation of whether the cloth would actually prevent acquiring the virus. From my own personal standpoint, I simply accept the proposition to wear a mask based on authority. My personal belief in it isn't fixed based on the method of science! Stay safe!
@@LogicPhilosophy Regarding masks, I'm in China and since the very beginning of the epidemic most people have worn masks from the authority method. The government widely circulated messages to the public that we must wear a mask. Not everyone complied. There were many instances of people being violently removed from public places for refusing to wear a mask. Here is an edit of some of the videos that were circulating on the internet in China:
th-cam.com/video/AFW1RLds45c/w-d-xo.html
I might be mistaken, but I understand different people can reach different conclusions when using the a priori method. Rather than follow the method of authority, you can hear the above mentioned rebels arguing along these lines:
"masks are for sick people, I feel fine, I must not be sick. Masks are also uncomfortable, thus I won't wear a mask."
Now after thinking about ti a bit, I'm a little confused:
The authority method
In the early days of the epidemic in China, the government made announcements to the masses that they should wear masks to prevent further spread of the virus. Most people in society immediately started wearing masks. I take it that most of these people came to the belief that they should wear a mask via the authority method.
At the same time, a few rebelious people refused to wear a mask. As expected with an authoritarian government, these individuals were punished, and there are many cases where people were recorded being violently dragged from public places for not wearing a mask.
th-cam.com/video/AFW1RLds45c/w-d-xo.html
I’m a little confused about this for a number of reasons. From my understanding the people that did not wear masks came to the belief through the a priori method? You can hear In the video above the peoples arguments generally went along these lines: “Masks are for sick people, I don’t feel sick, I’m not sick, and masks are uncomfortable, so I won’t wear a mask.” Would this be the a prior method? Or are they still following the method of authority? Because they are then forced to wear a mask.
Which is my next question: There are people that might have, via either method 1 or 3, fixated on the belief that they should not wear a mask, yet they have a conflicting belief that if they do not wear a mask they might get beat up or dragged out of public places.
So I guess the question is: for all the people in China, we are all forced into believing that we must wear a mask via the authority method, whether we deep down believe it or not. Correct?
Sorry for the late response. TH-cam held your comment as it contained "flagged words". Not sure what that means. I would say that if you came to a belief to wear a mask based upon the threat of some government or some external force (e.g. a parent, peers, etc.), then your belief would be fixed by the method of authority. I would say that if you decided to not wear a mask then it might be fixed in different ways. In the case involving the person that says "I don't need to wear a mask because I don't feel sick", I'd say that they likely fixed their belief by the a priori method. Peirce says the a priori method is highly intellectual and so we could be their reasoning in the following argument: "masks are only for sick people, I'm not sick; therefore, I don't need to wear a mask" (valid; even if it isn't sound).
The individual who decides not to wear a mask might continue to hold onto their belief through the method of tenacity. For example, if I'm told that "masks are not only for sick people because people may be asymptomatic and the masks are used to prevent further spreading of the disease", this might cause me to doubt my belief. BUT, I could deal with that doubt through the method of tenacity. I would simply ignore this or refuse to listen or shout at the person or something along those lines. In other words, you might have your belief fixed by one method but then deal with subsequent doubts by another method. Consider that many of our beliefs are initially fixed by our parents, schools, the State, or our senses (all forms of authority) but later we might deal with doubts about those beliefs through science, or tenacity, or the a priori method, or other authorities.
I don't know if I can answer your question about China. I'm frankly pretty ignorant about what is occurring there and so you probably would know better than me how people's beliefs are being fixed. I'd say that if people believe they should wear masks because they are being terrorized to wear them, then this would be the method of authority. It might vary. Maybe scientists believe you should wear masks based on an examination of the evidence and so their beliefs are fixed by science. Maybe some people wear them because they think it "makes sense" (a priori method). And, maybe there is a chunk of people who wear them strictly out of fear of punishment (authority).
@@P.Gillett and there’s people like me who wouldn’t wear it under any circumstance whatsoever because I do not believe the state has the right to limit my oxygen intake.
Not trying to argue, just highlighting other examples that exist
Second!
Naw, you're no 1.
First!
You are the winner!
Example of a priori that comes to mind is the influence of neoplatonism on the development of Christian theology. The arguments of the neoplatonist seem to boil down to, aren't you embarrassed of a god who would be involved with the material world. It's always a bit shocking to discover that this was a convincing argument, but it fit the intellectual fashion of the times.