Thought experiments

A thought experiment is basically a hypothetical situation.

Any philosophical stance can be strengthened by a thought experiment; a bare bones argument is just premises and a conclusion, a thought experiment is a hypothetical situation that illustrates your argument. Each thought experiment is designed to apply to a specific argument. It is not important (depending on the argument) that thought experiments be plausible or feasible in reality.

Some examples of thought experiments:

Molyneux's problem

Suppose there was a man born blind. He is made familiar with a metallic cube and a metallic sphere of the same material roughly the same size. Using his sense of touch he easily can tell one from the other. One day due to a miracle the blind man attains his sight. If the man was presented with the sphere and cube on a table, could he discern which was which without touching them?

Brain in a Bucket (the matrix)

What if reality as you know it is all an elaborate science experiment. You think you are who you are and live where you do but in reality you are a brain in a bucket in this mad scientist's laboratory hooked up to some sort of reality generating machine. Everyone and everything you know is a lie; a rouse.


What if the cube and the sphere had a particular smell? What if the reality machine was conveying the false reality of being a brain in a bucket? Thought experiments do not work if you do not accept them as they are. You cannot change a thought experiment to prove a point; if you did you would be creating a new thought experiment all together. Creating a new thought experiment is fine and well, but try not to do so until you have answered all the questions the original thought experiment has posed.

Next a philosopher spotlight!