Intro to Philosophy Exam 3

What is metaphysics?

The study of being

What is epistemology?

The study of knowledge

What is logic?

The study of correct reasoning

What is ethics?

The study of right and wrong, what is good and bad for an individual human

What is a hypothesis?

A proposition that is neither known to be true nor known to be false

What is a proposition?

A statement that is either true or false, although it is not necessarily known to be true or false

What is implication?

A conclusion that logically follows from one or more propositions

What is an argument?

The use of premises to support a conclusion

What is validity?

An argument is valid if the conclusion must be true whenever the premises are true

What is argumentation?

The process of producing and exchanging arguments

What, according to Peirce, determines each of us to draw one inference rather than another?

A habit of the mind that is either innate or learned

What, for Peirce, are the differences between doubt and belief?

Belief guides our actions while doubt makes people uneasy and dissatisfied

What, according to Peirce, is the method of tenacity?

Fixing belief stubbornly - stubbornly holding onto a belief simply because one already has it, and refusing to consider contrary evidence or opposing views.

What, according to Peirce, is the method of authority?

Fixing belief based on what is common in society. People who believe otherwise are punished. Social benefits---everyone is on the same page.

What, for Peirce, is the a priori method?

Fixing beliefs based on what seems plausible, intuitive, or philosophically pleasing before experience

What distinguishes the scientific method from all the others, according to Peirce?

The scientific method looks for evidence that is independent of the mind

What, for James, makes an option live?

A live option is one you are willing to act on

What, for James, makes an option forced?

A forced option is one that you must decide on

What, for James, makes an option momentous?

A momentous option is one that is significant

What does Clifford give as the only conditions under which one should believe anything?

Clifford says "it is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone to believe anything upon insufficient evidence." The only conditions under which one should believe anything is if they have sufficient evidence.

What does James mean by saying, "our faith is faith in someone else's faith"?

People are born into society practicing their religion which comes from their social group. Their belief is not isolated.

What, for James, are the real psychological factors that produce our convictions?

Passions, emotions, interests

What distinguishes an absolutist from an empiricist, according to James?

• Absolutist is going for infallibility

• Empiricist gives that up and wants to keep researching - never stops researching, keeps learning - science, but also philosophy
  
  Absolutist - state of "objective evidence" where we know with certainty that we have found the truth is attainable
  
  whereas the empiricist believes that although we may find truth, we can never be absolutely certain that we have done so.

What two duties do we have with regard to our opinions, according to James? Which of these two does he think philosophers should give more attention? Why?

We have the duty to find the truth and the duty to avoid error. He believes philosophers should give more attention to seeking truth because being too skeptical will lead to the loss of valuable truths

What reasons does James give for why we should believe in God?

When a choice is "genuine"—meaning it is live, forced, and momentous—and cannot be decided by evidence, we have the right to believe in God because such faith may be a necessary condition for discovering religious truth.

What, for Sartre, is the existentialist position with regard to essence and existence?

Existence precedes essence. Humans first exist and only later define their essence through their choices and actions.

What, for Sartre, is the difference between a being-in-itself and a being-for-itself?

Being-in-itself - static objects (like a table) that are their essence (a table is a table)

Being-for-itself - is human consciousness, defined by freedom and self-awareness. A being-for-itself is always becoming, creating meaning through choices

A table is complete as a table

• A human being has consciousness and uses it to protect itself, maintain social life and survive

• Being conscious makes us better, but the tradeoff is that i am not complete as a human being - questions of doubt

• We are condemned to be free - up to you to make it a great or mediocre life - power to live a mediocre life

What does Sartre believe are the implications for humans of God not existing?

Humans do not have an ultimate purpose. People have freedom that comes with the responsibility to define ourselves. There is no objective moral system without God.

What is the story of the boy who faces the dilemma of staying with his mother or joining the Free French Forces? What point does Sartre make with this story?

• Problem of a young man whos brother was killed in ww2, dad is chill w nazis, mom is sad, mom is left alone if he joins french forces, if he joins the other side, the other side loses the possibility to have someone on their side to overthrow the other side

• No priori method that will show u the way

• Up to subjective choice

• There is no book of ethics that will tell you what to do in every situation. You just have to choose because it is up to your subjective choice.

What does Sartre mean by claiming that "man is condemned to be free"?

Freedom comes with anguish. It gives us opportunity but it comes with the fact that each person has to create meaning for their own lives.

What is the existentialist meaning of "You are nothing else than your life"?

Humans define themselves by their actions and how they live their lives. There is nothing after death, so a person is defined by their life.

What is the problem of the criterion, according to Chisholm?

1. I know P

2. Can we use method X to prove that we know P? -> what method will tell us whether method X is sound? -> infinite regress

3. Is method X successful?

4. If yes, how do we know?

Two problematic outcomes --- infinite regress or circular reasoning

we cannot determine what we know until we have a criterion for knowledge, but we cannot establish a criterion until we have examples of what we know to test it against.

What do dogmatists and skeptics have in common, for Chisholm? What distinguishes them?

Dogamtists: claim we know the criteria for knowlesge, and can use them to determine what we know.

Skeptics: Claim we cannot know the criteria, and therefore we cannot be certain that we know anything.

Dogmatists believe they know more than they do, while skeptics believe they know less than they do. Both are extreme and incorrect.

Both are concerned with the criterion problem and the relationship between knowledge and criteria.

What three conditions does Mercier put on there being a criterion of truth? Explain each.

1. Internal - The mind must be able to find sufficient reason to accept the idea without being influenced by external factors or authorities.

2. Objective - The idea must not be influenced by one's psychological state

3. Immediate - The idea must be evident without requiring a lengthy process of reasoning

What analogy does Descartes use to explain why we need a criterion of truth?

He suggests that our minds are like baskets filled with beliefs (apples) acquired since childhood, some of which may be false (rotten). Just as one rotten apple can spread its decay to the entire bunch, a single false belief could potentially contaminate other beliefs in one's system of knowledge, making the whole lot uncertain. This is why Descartes argues we need to find a method to sort these apples.

What two questions does Chisholm use to frame the different views on the criterion problem?

What do we know? What is the extent of our knowledge?

How are we to decide whether we know? What is the criterion of knowledge?

What, for Chisholm, is a particularist? Explain the particularist view on the criterion issue.

particularist is someone who addresses the problem of the criterion by assuming they already know specific, common-sense facts and uses those examples to work backward and identify the general rules of knowledge.

What, for Chisholm, is a methodist? Explain the methodist view on the criterion issue.

A methodist believes that we know a method for finding the truth and, based on this method, we can figure out what we know.

What use does the skeptic make of the two key questions Chisholm identifies?

The skeptic decides that neither question can be answered and therefore people cannot know anything

What, according to Chisholm, are the two problems with empiricism?

1. It must start out with an arbitrary criterion for knowledge

2. Throws out both bad and good apples. Leads to skepticism about anything that is not included in the criterion.

How, for Chisholm, should we regard our senses in our search for knowledge? Explain.

It is rationally preferable to trust your senses than to distrust them unless there is a reason for suspicion. We can often recognize when our senses are deceiving us. Just because the mind is subject to error does not mean we are experiencing an error now.

What is the Classical Account of knowledge? And what is the Gettier problem?

The Classical Account of knowledge is that it is justified, true belief. Justification bridges the gap between knowledge and truth. The Gettier problem is that someone can have a belief that is true and justified, but isn't actually knowledge because the justification is flawed or based on luck, making the truth coincidental

Explain the "Single Mother Argument" for moral subjectivism

Stealing is generally considered wrong, but many people believe that it is not wrong for a single mother to steal in order to save her children for starvation. This means that stealing is not always considered by everyone to be wrong and therefore its morality is subjective.

What is distinctive of modern moral theory?

Modern moral theory considers what is morally right or wrong rather than focusing on virtues

What is moral intuitionism?

view that some moral truths are known directly and non-inferentially through moral intuition, rather than being derived from observation, reasoning, or empirical evidence. -we can directly “see” some moral truths without inference.

How does moral intuitionism handle the "Single Mother Argument"?

The Single Mother is permitted to steal in this case because the ground 'Feed her starving children' overrides stealing.

How does empirical psychology support the claim that there are objective moral values?

Moral values reflect objective features of human well-being and social life

How does empirical psychology support Stoic value theory?

well-being depends more on our judgments and mental attitudes than on external circumstances - so what we value internally matters more than what happens to us externally.

What problem does Russell find with Descartes's "I think, therefore, I am" claim?

Assumes the existence of the “I” it is trying to prove, making the argument circular.

How does Russell attempt to show that idealism is incorrect?

by showing that its denial of external relations conflicts with logic, science, and ordinary experience

What is the difference between knowledge by acquaintance and knowledge by description?

Knowledge by acquaintance - Knowledge that is gained through sense-data (perception)

Knowledge by description - Indirect knowledge conveyed by its description