Philosophy Exam 2

1.     You should be able to explain the problem of induction (Hume's argument for the conclusion that all our reasoning about matters of fact is faulty)

P1: In the past regularities have occurred

P2: The future will be like the past

Conclusion: In the future the same regularities will occur

P2 is false because even though we have observed a constant pattern it could change, or we could’ve missed a step.

2.     You should be able to state the problem of the criterion the way I did in class.

In order to know that things are the way they appear we need a procedure for distinguishing the appearances from false appearances. But in order to know that we have correctly distinguished true from false appearances, we need to know that the procedure works. But we can’t know which appearances works unless we already know which appearances are true and which are false. This creates a vicious cycle. It seems that in order to know that we know something we already have to know it.

3.     You should be able to explain the three responses to the problem of the criterion. You should know which response Chisholm thinks is best and explain why he thinks it is the best response.

Methodist- They came up with a Method first, then apply the Method to particular cases. Objection- It is arbitrary

Particularist- Look for Particular cases of knowledge and the use of those to come up with a method. He likes this one best.

Skeptic- We can’t know anything Objection- it is dumb, we know things

4.     You should know the response to the Brain In a Vat argument about justification. (explain what is wrong with the BIV argument, two kinds of false beliefs...)

If we can’t prove that BIV people can’t know that they are a BIV then we can’t justify that we ourselves aren’t BIV.

Counter: It would be unreasonable to say that we don’t know what “hand” is. He says we can for the most part trust our sense (bad to ignore “evidence” when it is right in front of you)

2 kinds of false beliefs:

1.     False beliefs that are your fault. (have not done enough room research)like moon (should have known better)

2.     False beliefs that are not your fault (kids believing in Santa) Due diligence is done to test beliefs.

We are justified in believing that we are not a BIV

Hume’s Knowledge:

Matters of Fact- Knowable through experience. They are contingent, their negation does not imply a contradiction. Examples: cause and effect, everyday experience, laws of nature and science.

Relations of Ideas- Knowable a priori, or by the more operation of reason. Their negation implies a contradiction. Examples: Math,Logic, definition.

How Hume thinks we reason about matters of fact:

P1-In the past regularities have occured

P2- The future will be like the past

Conclusion: In the future the same regularities will occur.