Exam 1

Question 1

What is philosophy?

Answer 1

the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence, especially when considered as an academic discipline.

Question 2

Four main areas of philosophy? Subject of each area?

Answer 2

1. Epistomology: concerned with the nature of knowledge, origin, and scope of knowledge.
2. Metaphysics: the study of the most general aspects of reality, such as substance, identity, the nature of the mind, and free will. In other way is a study of nature and the nature of the world in which man lives
3. Logic: The study of correct reasoning and arguments.
4. Ethics: The study of morality. Making “correct” or “right” decisions.

Question 3

Plato’s Allegory of the Cave

Answer 3

Chains = Our bodies
Being dragged from cave = education-philosophy
World outside of cave = the real world
Shadowy cave = what most of us think is the real world

Question 4

Logical consistence?

Answer 4

If there is a logically possible instance in which all of the statements in a set are true. In other words, the set does not contain any contradictions.

Question 5

Causally Possible

Answer 5

If it is possible for something to be true in this world only. IN other words, if something does not defy the laws of nature.

Question 6

Logically Possible

Answer 6

If it is possible for something to be true in any other world. If you could make a movie about it. Statements do not contradict.

Question 7

Definitions - why are they important? Lexical vs. Real

Answer 7

Lexical Definition: The lexical definition of a term, also known as the dictionary definition, is the meaning of the term in common usage.
Real Definition: Definition that explains the essential nature of a thing or phenomena.
Philosophers are concerned more with Real Definitions because they give more information that is used of philosophical reasoning.

Question 8

Necessary and Sufficient Conditions

Answer 8

Implication about the the relationship between statements.
Necessity: "You must have X for Y to happen." Having X does not guarantee Y, however having Y does mean you had to have had X. Example: Sunshine is needed for rose to bloom. However sunshine does not guarantee it blooming. Without sunshine, it will not bloom.
Sufficiency: "Having X, guarantees having Y." Example: getting a 95% in a class is sufficient for getting an A in the class. This is because getting a 95% guarantees that you get an A. It is not necessary because you can also get a 92% to get an A.

Question 9

Counterexample

Answer 9

A statement that defeats a universal claim by showing it to be false in some instance.
“All swans are white” can be defeated with a counterexample: evidence of a black swan.

Question 10

Thought experiment

Answer 10

Devices of the imagination used to investigate the nature of things. They are used for diverse reasons in a variety of areas, including economics, history, mathematics, philosophy, and the sciences, especially physics.

Question 11

Possible Worlds

Answer 11

Similar to parallel universes in that any situation could have gone in a variety of different ways. Children conceived could have never been, wars lost could have been won, decisions could have been made either way… Imaginary situations that could have happened

Question 12

Arguments

Answer 12

An attempt to persuade someone of something, by giving reasons for accepting a particular conclusion as evident.

Question 13

Premise Indicator

Answer 13

A word in an argument that “flags” the premise of the argument. For instance: “Because abortion is murder, it is always morally wrong.” the word ‘because’ is a premise indicator. Examples: because, since, given that, and for.

Question 14

Conclusion Indicator

Answer 14

A word in an argument that “flags” the conclusion of the argument. For instance: “You aren’t in school, therefore you should get a job.” The word ‘therefore’ is a conclusion indicator. Examples: thus, hence, therefore, so, it follows that.

Question 15

Deductive arguments

Answer 15

A deductive argument is one in which it is impossible for the premises to be true but the conclusion false. Thus, the conclusion follows necessarily from the premises and inferences.

Question 16

Valid argument

Answer 16

Has to do with the “form” of the argument. Meaning that the premises need not be true, nor the conclusion. Only that IF they were true, the conclusion would also be true. If an argument has true premises, but a false conclusion it is invalid.

Question 17

Sound Argument

Answer 17

An argument that is valid and has all true premises.

Question 18

How do we evaluate deductive arguments?

Answer 18

We evaluate deductive arguments by looking at their soundness and validity.

Question 19

What are inductive arguments? How do we evaluate them?

Answer 19

Inductive reasoning allows for the possibility that the conclusion is false, even if all of the premises are true. Instead of being valid or invalid, inductive arguments are either strong or weak, which describes how probable it is that the conclusion is true. Example: “The police said John committed the murder. So, John committed the murder.”

Question 20

Modus Ponens

Answer 20

Latin for “mode that affirms”

1. If P, then Q.
2. P
   - —————–
3. Therefore, Q

Question 21

Modus Tollens

Answer 21

Latin for “mode that denies”

1. If P, then Q.
2. Not Q.
   - —————–
3. Therefore, not P.

Question 22

Disjunctive Syllogism

Answer 22

1. Either Q or P.
2. Not Q.
   - ————————
3. Therefore, P.

Question 23

Hypothetical Syllogism

Answer 23

1. If P, then Q.
2. If Q, then R.
   - ———————-
3. Therefore: if P, then R.

Question 24

Enumerative Argument

Answer 24

An inductive argument that attempts to make a connection between a particular instance and all other instances. For example, if one observed 100 swans and those 100 were white swans, one might make the enumerative argument that all swans are white.

1. Observed P are F.
2. Therefore, all P are F.

Question 25

Argument by Inference to the best Explanation

Answer 25

An inductive argument that goes from an observation to a hypothesis that accounts for the observation, ideally seeking to find the simplest and most likely explanation. An explanation that either (1) is simpler than other expanations, or (2) one that fits in better with what you believe about the world.

Question 26

Ockham's Razor

Answer 26

Philosophical tool. All other things being equal, explanation A is better than explanation B if explanation A is indeed simpler that explanation B.

Question 27

Principle of conservatism

Answer 27

Explanation A is better than Explaination B if explanation A fits in better with what we know about the world. See "argument by inference to best explanation"

Question 28

Three types of knowledge? Which type are philosophers concerned with?

Answer 28

1. Personal Knowledge: knowledge by acquaintance. This is the kind of knowledge that we are claiming to have when we say things like “I know Mozart’s music.” 2. Procedural Knowledge: knowledge how to do something. People who claim to know how to juggle, or how to drive, are claiming that they possess the skills to do those things. 3. Propositional Knowledge: knowledge of facts. When we say things like “I know that the internal angles of a triangle add up to 180 degress” or “I know that it was you that ate my sandwich”, we are claiming to have propositional knowledge.

Question 29

Philosophical Definition of Knowledge?

Answer 29

Philosophers are concerned with knowledge that is true, justified, belief.

Question 30

Gettier Counter Examples

Answer 30

Counterexamples to the philosophical assertion that knowledge is "true, justified, belief." Gettier presents two cases about (1) a man name Smith and him getting a job, (2) a man named Jones and his ford truck.

Question 31

Skepticism

Answer 31

Any attitude that questions knowledge, facts, or opinions/beliefs stated as facts.

Question 32

Skepticism - Local

Answer 32

The view that one cannot possess knowledge in some particular domain. Example: somebody that believes there is no good or bad is a moral skeptic. Only skeptic about a specific instance.

Question 33

Skepticism - Global

Answer 33

The view that one cannot know anything at all. Proposed by Descartes.

Question 34

Cartesian Method of Doubt

Answer 34

A method that Rene Descartes used to systematically doubt every belief he held that way he could be certain of those that were without doubt true. In the cartesian sense of knowledge, knowledge is something that is true beyond all possible doubt.

Question 35

Descartes dream argument

Answer 35

Heuristic Device: Descarte's notion that he is dreaming and therefore cannot prove that anything around him is real. Similar to the matrix movie.

Question 36

Evil Genius Argument

Answer 36

Heuristic Device: Descarte's notion that some evil genius is tricking him into believing all of the things that he believes.

Question 37

What does Descartes know?

Answer 37

He knows that he exists. He knows this because of his statement "I Think, Therefore I am"

Question 38

Solopsism

Answer 38

A theory in philosophy that your own existence is the only thing that is real or that can be known. You can only know the contents of your own mind.

Question 39

Prima facie

Answer 39

Latin for "on first sight" | Meaning that something is to be accepted as truth "on first sight," until proven otherwise.

Question 40

What is empiricism? Different versions of empiricism? Problems with empiricism?

Answer 40

Empiricism is the justification of knowledge using only the senses. Type: Naive Realism Indirect Realism Idealism The problem with empiricism is that our sense can mislead us. (Each hand in a bucket of water with different temperature)

Question 41

Basic empirical beliefs

Answer 41

Beliefs that are directly derived from our experiences. If I see a red telephone in front of me, it triggers the basic belief that there is indeed a red telephone in front of me. Basic beliefs depend on our trust in our senses.

Question 42

Principle of perceptual realism

Answer 42

Belief that material objects exist independently of our perception of them. Supports empiricism.

Question 43

Naive Realism

Answer 43

Naive realism is the belief that we see reality as it really is – objectively and without bias; that the facts are plain for all to see; that rational people will agree with us; and that those who don't are either uninformed, lazy, irrational, or biased.

Question 44

Indirect Realsim

Answer 44

John Locke's View: Indirect realism is broadly equivalent to the accepted view of perception in natural science that states that we do not and cannot perceive the external world as it really is but know only our ideas and interpretations of the way the world is.

Question 45

Idealism

Answer 45

Empiricist theory that abandons the notion that "real" objects exist outside of our perceptions. Instead, it asserts that the objects we feel are only collections of perceptions created by the mind.

Question 46

Primary and secondary Properties

Answer 46

Primary Properties: properties that exist in objects themselves. Size, shape, molecular texture. Secondary Properties: properties that are defined by the mind. Color, taste, smell, warmth, cold.

Question 47

Rationalism

Answer 47

Epistemological theory that believes we can justify our knowledge using reason alone.

Question 48

A priori

Answer 48

When you know something before experience.

Question 49

A posteriori

Answer 49

When you know something after experience.

Question 50

Necessary truth

Answer 50

A necessary truth is a proposition that could not possibly have been false. This can be expressed by saying that a necessary truth is a proposition that is true in every possible world. An example of a truth that many philosophers take to be necessary in this sense is: 2+2 = 4.

Question 51

Contingent Truth

Answer 51

A truth that depends on the nature of the real world. "The year is 2014"

Question 52

The problem of induction

Answer 52

Problem for empiricists. States that we cannot make inferences about the future based on the empirical evidence we have now. We can only draw conclusions on the things that we have already experienced.

Question 53

Analytic Truth

Answer 53

Truths that can be determined as true by the meanings of the words involved. "All neutrons are subatomic particles." Because a neutron is a subatomic particle, we know that this statement is true.

Question 54

Synthetic Truth

Answer 54

Truths that must be experimented on, observed, or calculated to determine if indeed true. "Obama owns a ford focus." "The population of NYC is more than that of Las Cruces"

Question 55

Logical Positivism

Answer 55

Empiricists that criticize rationalists. They state that rationalism only deals with information that is trivial. Information that is easy to know, that we know simply by living. A priori knowledge is not useful.

Question 56

Theism

Answer 56

belief in the existence of a god or gods, especially belief in one god as creator of the universe, intervening in it and sustaining a personal relation to his creatures.

Question 57

Atheism

Answer 57

disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.

Question 58

Agnostic

Answer 58

a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena; a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God.

Question 59

Ontological Proof

Answer 59

An ontological argument is any one of a category of philosophical arguments for the existence of God using ontology. St. Anslems argument was that "If god only existed in mind, he would not be the greatest thing in the universe. Therefore, by definition, if god is the greatest thing in the universe, he must also exist outside of my mind."

Question 60

Aquinas's Five Ways

Answer 60

Thomas Aquina's Five Proofs for Existence of God 1. Argument for motion - The first mover 2. Argument for efficient causes - The first cause/reason 3. Possibility and Necessity - there exists a being which is necessary for itself and does not depend on something else 4. Gradation - there is better, worse, best, worst. Therefore, there must be a best "being" 5. Argument for Design - some things lack knowledge, yet are directed to their goals by humans. Things are directed towards goals by a third party.

Question 61

Pascal's wager

Answer 61

An argument that states that it is in one's best interest to believe in god wether or not he exists.

Question 62

Expected Utility

Answer 62

Discussed in Pascal's Wager when talking about decisions under uncertainty. What you can rationally expect to gain from making a decision. A predicted utility value for one of several options, calculated as the sum of the utility of every possible outcome each multiplied by the probability of its occurrence.

Question 63

Decisions under uncertainty

Answer 63

Decisions that we make when we do not know what the outcome will be.

Question 64

Evidential Problem of Evil

Answer 64

State that the existence of a AAA god in not imcomaptible with evil. Yet the existence of evil goes against God. Therefore it is highly improbable that God exists. Inductive Argument.

Question 65

Logical Problem of Evil

Answer 65

States that the existence of a AAA god is completely incompatible (contradictory) with the existence of evil. Therefore it is logically impossible that god exists. Deductive Argument.

Question 66

Theodicy (examples)

Answer 66

The attempt to answer the question of why a good God permits the manifestation of evil. "To determine who is worthy" "There would be no good without bad" "Suffering builds character"

Question 67

Logical inconsistence

Answer 67

A set of sentences is said to be inconsistent if there is no possible situation in which they are all true.

Question 68

Analogical Argument

Answer 68

Inductive argument that makes an analogy between two statements. 1. F is like P 2. P has property A 3. Therefore F has property A. Depends on strength of analogy between F and P.