8 thought experiments that will make you think

riddle blind

This thought experiment was born in a dispute between philosophers John Locke and William Molyneux.

Imagine a blind person of birth, who knows how to touch the ball is different from the cube. If he suddenly begin to see clearly whether he visually distinguish these items will? Can not. As long as the tactile perception will not be associated with visual, he would not know where the ball is, and where - the cube.

The experiment shows that up to a certain point, we have no knowledge of the world, even those who appear to us as "natural" and congenital.

Infinite monkey theorem

We believe that Shakespeare, Tolstoy, Mozart - geniuses, because their creations are unique and perfect. And if you have been told that their works could not appear?

probability theory holds that anything that can happen will happen at infinity. If an infinite number of monkeys sit behind the typewriter and give them an infinite amount of time, ever one of them necessarily word for word repeat some Shakespeare play.

All that can happen is going to happen - what then place individual talents and achievements?

Collision balls

We know that the morning will be replaced at night, that the glass is broken with a strong impact, and falling from an apple tree will fly down. But that creates in us the conviction? Real connections between things and our belief in this reality?

Philosopher David Hume showed that our belief in the causal relationships between things nothing more than faith, which is generated by our previous experience.

We are convinced that the evening will change the day, just because it is always up to that point night follows day. Absolute certainty we can not be.

Imagine two billiard balls. One of the other beats, and we believe that the first ball is the cause of the second movement. However, we can imagine that the second ball will remain in place after the collision with the first. We are nothing prevents to do it. So, from the very first ball movement is not logically follows the movement of the second and the causal link solely based on our previous experience (we have previously many times faced balloons and see the result).

Donated raffle

Philosopher John Harris suggested to imagine a world different from our two things. Firstly, there is believed that allow a person to death - the same thing as killing him. Secondly, the organ transplant operations there are always performed well. What follows from this? This donation will be a society ethical norms because one donor can save a lot of people. Then it held a lottery, which determines a person at random who will have to sacrifice himself in order not to let die a few patients.

One death instead of many - from the point of view of logic is justified by the victim. However, in our world, it sounds blasphemous. The experiment helps us understand that it is not built our ethics on a rational basis.

philosophical zombie

Philosopher David Chalmers in 1996 in one of his reports, has puzzled the world the concept of "philosophical zombie." This imaginary creature, which is identical in all humans. It rises in the morning to the sound of the alarm, he goes to work, smiling friends. His stomach, the heart, the brain works the same way as humans. But there is one component at the same time he - internal experiences of what is happening. He fell and injured his knee, zombie scream like a man, but he does not feel pain. In it there is no consciousness. Zombie acts as a computer.

If the human mind - the result of biochemical reactions in the brain, what in such a case, the person will be different from this zombie? If a zombie and a person on the physical level, no different then what is consciousness? In other words, whether there is in man something that is not caused by material interactions?

Brain in a vat

This experiment suggested that the philosopher Hilary Putnam.

Our perception is constructed as follows: the senses perceive external data and convert them into an electrical signal, which is sent to the brain and deciphered them. Imagine the following situation: we take the brain, place it in a special supporting vital functions solution, and send electrical signals by means of electrodes in the same way as it would do bodies feelings.

What would upset a brain? The same thing as the brain in the skull: it would seem that he is a man, he "saw" and "heard" would be something, would be thinking about something.

The experiment shows that we do not have sufficient evidence to suggest that our experience - the ultimate reality.

It is possible that we are all in a flask, and all around us a sort of virtual space.

Chinese room

What distinguishes a computer from a man? Can you imagine a future in which machines replace humans in all areas? Thought experiment Sorlya philosopher John makes it clear that there is.

Imagine a man locked in a room. He does not know the Chinese language. The room has a slot through which a person receives questions written in Chinese. He can not answer them himself, he even read them can not. However, there is room to transform the instructions of some characters in the other. That is, it says that if you see on paper is a combination of characters, you should respond in such a hieroglyph.

Thus, thanks to the instructions for transforming characters people will be able to answer questions in Chinese, not understanding the meaning of questions, nor their own answers. This is the principle of the artificial intelligence.

The curtain of ignorance

Philosopher John Rawls suggested to imagine a group of people who will create the kind of society: the laws, government agencies, the social order. These people have neither citizenship nor sex, nor any experience - that is, designing a society, they can not rely on its own interests. They do not know what role each will drop in the new society. What kind of society they would build as a result of some theoretical assumptions will come?

It is unlikely they would have been at least one of the existing societies today. The experiment shows that all social organizations, in practice, one way or another act in the interests of certain groups of people.