Intro to Philosophy Final Exam

Cowan & Spiegel outline several definitions of 'art'. Identify two suggested definitions, and indicate at least one strength and at least one weakness of each definition. (420-23)

1. Any human made object Strength: art is the result of a purposeful activity Weakness: it is too broad 2. Whatever brings aesthetic pleasure to those who experience the object Strength: its appealing to the audience Weakness: need clear definition of aesthetic pleasure

Nicholas Wolterstorff identifies five purposes of artistic world projection that Christian artists should embrace and focus upon. Identify (at least) two of Wolterstorff's purposes, and suggest why they matter. (428-29)

1. Communication - It allows for communication between the artist and the painter. - Evokes emotions. 2. Confirmatory - Projected Worlds are not real, but do have truths about the real world within. - A world true to what is significant and important 3. Illumination - Grant us insight and clarify our thinking - Shows us things about the world we have overlooked or ignored. 4. Modeling - Persuade us to change our mind on things 5. Consolation - Trains our minds upon some hopeful aspect of the human conditions.

Cowan and Spiegel identify four 'aesthetic virtues' that Christian artists should emulate. List the four virtues, and briefly explain one of them. (435-36)

1. Diligence 2. Veracity 3. Truth - interpreting and understanding how they perceive truths about reality and matching them to how reality really is - excellent artists are excellent perceivers. 4. Boldness

Of the three historical theistic proofs (Anselm's ontological, Aquinas's cosmological, Paley's teleological), outline one such proof, and highlight one strength and one weakness of that argument. (259-63)

Anselm's ontological argument I have an idea of the GCB. That which exists in reality (and not only in my mind) is greater than that which exists only in my mind. If the GCB existed only in my mind, then the GCB would not be the GCB (because I can conceive of it existing in reality, not only in my mind) Therefore, the GCB exists in reality Strength: Logically valid and sound and as long as you see existence as a property, it works. Problems: Some say that if this works at all, it can also be used to prove the existence of anything.

Identify at least two common (formal or informal) fallacies (25-31). Construct your own example of each.

Attacking the person: Trump will be a bad president because he has bad hair. The way his hair looks has nothing to do with his qualifications for president. False dilemma: We can either eat at Taco Bell or Taco Bueno. There are more than just two options.

Identify at least two common forms of valid deductive argument (21-25). For one valid deductive argument form, construct two examples of the argument form, one of which is sound, the other of which is unsound. Explain why one is sound and the other unsound.

Categorical syllogisms Hypothetical syllogisms: If P then Q. Not-Q. Therefore, not-P. Sound: If there are no objective moral principles, then murder is morally permissible. Murder is not morally permissible. Therefore, there are objective moral principles. Unsound: If someone is a girl, then they like the color pink. Ana does not like the color pink. Therefore, Ana is not a girl.

Of the three major theories of truth (correspondence, coherentism, and pragmatism), which one do you embrace? Briefly outline that perspective of truth, and explain why you prefer it to the others (36-43).

Correspondence theory: a proposition is true if and only if it corresponds to the way things actually are. It affirms objective truth. It's also known as the "common sense" theory. coherentism allows for a person to make their own truth, it is subjective pragmatism says it's true if it works; this is utilitarian and also subjective

Outline cultural relativism (conventionalism) as a branch of ethical relativism, and point out one or two key weaknesses (325-29).

Cultural Relativism - Moral Truth is subjective to different cultures or societies. - There is no objective truth. Problems - Leads us to embrace things that we see as clearly false because other cultures might see it as truly ethical - If cultural relativism is true, we cannot criticize other cultures. - Leaves no room for moral improvement.

Cowan and Spiegel highlight eight important aspects of philosophical method, five of which are evidenced in the life of Socrates, three of which are drawn from elsewhere. (2-7) Identify at least two of those aspects, and suggest why they are indeed important for the philosopher to practice.

Defining terms: we can't argue for or against something if we don't know what it is we are arguing; defining terms also prevents petty squabbles over vocabulary Socratic ignorance: when we admit we don't know everything then we can truly learn; it shows humility and a teachable spirit; it is crucial to philosophy

For either natural law ethics (359-61) or divine command theory (361-65), (a) outline the non-naturalistic ethical theory, and (b) suggest a primary strength of the theory as well as (c) a potential weakness of the theory.

Divine Command Theory a. - Non-naturalistic theory that believes in an objective moral truth. - Morals come from whatever God reveals to His creation. - He can reveal it as teachings (like He does through Jesus) or as outright commands (like in the OT). b. Strength: Being created by a divine creator, there is a threat of divine punishment which provides the necessary moral motivation. c. Weakness: How does man know which God is divine? Which holy book gives the "correct" divine command?

What is the difference between ethical theory and ethical practice? How are they related to one another? (322-24)

Ethical Theory - a general framework for orienting us regarding principles and other considerations in moral decision-making. Ethical Practice - This is the idea of putting use to what you decide about meta ethics (ethics as a whole). In order to be able to put your ethics into practice, it is important to be aware of your ethical theory so you can better have an idea of what to do in varying situations.

Which of the three traditional perspectives on the relationship between art and ethics (aestheticism, moralism, ethicism) do you embrace? Why? (437-40)

Ethicism; I believe that is the most reasonable and rational. Art can be made well and have great aesthetic value even if it's subject matter is unsavory. However, artists must be morally accountable and seedy subject matter can take away from the enjoyment and overall approval of the art.

Of the two contemporary theistic arguments (fine-tuning, kalam cosmological), outline one such proof, and highlight one strength and one weakness of that argument. (264-73)

Fine Tuning The fine-tuning of the universe is due either to necessity, chance, or intelligent design. The fine-tuning of the universe is not due to necessity or chance. Therefore, the fine-tuning is the result of intelligent design. Strength: Knowing that if some of the natural laws had been off even slightly, this does imply that ID is the best option. Weakness: Although highly unlikely, chance still could be an option.

Cowan & Spiegel outline several variations of physicalist accounts of human beings (205-12). Choose either functionalism or eliminative materialism: (a) identify a philosophical proponent (supporter) of the position; (b) give one or two arguments in favor of the position; (c) identify one or two arguments against the position; and (d) briefly deliver your verdict on the position.

Functionalism: a. Daniel Dennet is a proponent of Functionalism. b. Gives the human brain a purpose (or a function), also the driving force for artificial intelligence. c. Does not account for the qualitative facts of mental life. d. While it is nice that this belief gives a function for the mental state, I do not support it because I believe the mind and body are two separate things that work together.

How does Hobbes' conception of social contract differ from Locke's conception of social contract? Which perspective (Hobbes or Locke) is reflected in the US Constitution and form of government? (390-94)

Hobbes' form is a conservative theory, which means it attempts to maintain order. Locke's form is a liberal theory, which means it attempts to curb power. a. Hobbes - Social Contract Absolutism - A covenant or 'Social Contract' would rescue people from the inevitable "condition of war" that would characterize like without laws. - Free and rational people must surrender freedoms for security. - People collectively agree to appoint a leader who has absolute power. - After elected, no one may question the power of this person because of the agreement - This is basically just monarchy with an agreement to who will have power at the start. b. Locke - Social Contract: liberalism - The act of the majority consents for the whole. - Rule by the governed. - Majority must advocate their power for protection by a sovereign. - This rescues them from the "Condition of war" that would characterize life without laws. - If the government breaches individual rights, the people have a right to dissolve the government. This returns the people to the "Condition of War". - Locke's theories are used in the US Constitution. If the government breaches the rights of individuals, people have a right (Perhaps even duty) to over throw the government.

Why does Alvin Plantinga argue that we do not need to have rational arguments in order to be justified in our belief in God? Do you agree with him? Why or why not? (274-76)

Humans are created with a divine sense of God; he is evident in creation and imprinted upon us. Because of this, belief in God can be a properly basic belief. Those who don't believe have the negative effects of sin blocking them from believing. I agree, we don't need rational arguments to believe in God. Faith is having confidence in what we cannot see.

Outline the circularity of David Hume's argument against the possibility of miracles based upon the inviolability of the laws of nature.

If miracles occur then they violate the laws of nature the laws of nature cannot be violated therefore miracles do not happen Hume argues that miracles can't occur because they would violate the laws of nature. the laws of nature can not be violated because it would take a miracle. but miracles don't happen. Why? because miracles would violate the laws of nature begging the question; circular reasoning

Provide at least one argument both in favor of and against anarchism (political theory). (384-86)

In Favor of Anarchism: In an ideal world, people will do what they believe is right without needing to be governed at all. Against Anarchism: How can social goals be attained without some sort of enforcement of the rules.

What is the problem of induction? How do Cowan & Spiegel suggest it can best be solved? Why? (130-32)

Induction is putting things in a chain of reasoning to justify beliefs. Cowan and Spiegel suggest that putting God in a chain of reasoning will be sufficient because of their belief in the Divine Providence of God that reigns over everything, including the laws of nature.

Your text (and professor) suggests that philosophy inevitably involves asking and seeking answers to 'the big questions of life'. (1-2) (a) Identify at least two 'big questions'. (b) Suggest one or two reasons why some people might choose not to ask/seek answers to those two questions.

Is God real? What happens after we die? they might have to change they way they view things or live they fear the answers; might figure out that what they believe is wrong

Outline the components of the traditional (JTB) account of knowledge (65-72). How do Gettier-type counter-examples challenge the JTB account? Do you think such challenges are successful or not? Why or why not?

JTB says that a person can know something if: they believe it, it's true, and they are justified in believing it (they have reason to) Gettier-type challenges: JTB is not fully sufficient for knowledge you can come to "know" something by coincidence; or be mistaken in what you believe ex: man reads fortune cookie that says he will win a great prize, he believes that he will win the state lottery, he wins the lottery; but he didn't know he would win ex: Peter Parker is in the same room as a Spider man imposter; a man believes that Spider man is in the room; Peter Parker (real spider man) is in the room, but the man thinks that the imposter is the real spider man

Provide both the libertarian and compatibilist definitions for 'free will'. Which definition do you support, and why? (226-40)

Libertarian: At least some human actions are free from the nexus of cause and effect within the physical universe. Incompatible with determinism. Human beings (sometimes) have the ability to do different than what they actually do. Compatibilist: Freedom is the "ability to act according to one's desires and intentions." Freedom and determinism are compatible. Says that the fact that human actions are determined does pose a threat to freedom and moral responsibility. Personally, I would lean towards a compatibilist view because while we have a choice in what actions we do, there could be pre-determined consequences to those actions.

Outline the difference between objectivism, subjectivism and conventionalism regarding truth (33-34).

Objectivism: there is a truth that is true for all people in all places at all times Subjectivism: each person decides what is true for themselves; there is no real truth Conventionalism: culture determines what is true; there is no truth; its a social construct

How does Immanuel Kant's epistemological distinction between phenomena and noumena challenge traditional and contemporary metaphysics? How might one respond to Kant's challenge? (147-50)

Phenomenal realm is the world as it appears to us. The noumenal realm is the real world outside of our minds. We cannot know the real world. The real things of the noumenal realm affect the way we see things in the phenomenal realm. Since we can't actually perceive the noumenal realm, it can't acutally be known. There is incoherence in Kant's beliefs of these realms. If the noumenal realm exists in the way Kant says it does, there would be no way to actually know it exists.

Briefly outline your personal statement of what philosophy is, and why philosophy matters.

Philosophy is inquiring into the world around us and asking questions about reality. Philosophy is in every aspect of our lives whether we know it or not. We all have beliefs and perspectives on the world. We should learn and engage philosophy to become the best versions of ourselves. (the unexamined life isn't worth living- Aristotle) Especially as Christians we need to be familiar with secular ideas as well as why we believe what we believe so we can engage the world around us and defend our beliefs.

Briefly explain the primary distinctions between rationalism and empiricism concerning knowledge (52-59). Identify at least two philosophers belonging to each school.

Rationalism: knowledge comes through reason, Plato and Descartes Empiricism: knowledge comes through experience, Locke and Aristotle

What is prescriptive religious pluralism? Identify at least one argument in favor of religious pluralism, and outline at least one argument against religious pluralism. (304-07)

Religious pluralism is the belief that not one religion is exclusively true and that all religions are equal. in favor: argument from unity of teaching: says that all religions teach and have the same basic goal and principles against: the law of non-contradiction: says that something must be either true or false, all religions teach different things. They are monotheistic and poly theistic. They have different leaders and deities. They have different sacred literature. Just the differences between Christianity and Islam are stark.

Outline subjectivism as a branch of ethical relativism, and point out one or two key weaknesses (330-32).

Subjectivism - There is no objective moral truth. - Moral values are determined by individual people. - Ethics are subjective from person to person rather than cultures like in Cultural Relativism. Problems - People cannot disagree with others ethical practices. - Everyone is justified in their actions because it is what their morals are and not as a whole.

List the three fundamental laws of thought (18-19). Unpack one of them - describe what it means, why it is important, and why it is unavoidable in human thought.

The law of non-contradiction The law of excluded middle: a proposition cannot be both true and false at the same time either Trump is president or he's not; it has to be either true or false The law of identity

How do Near-Death Experiences (NDEs) purportedly provide evidence for both body-soul dualism and life after death? (244-48)

There have been nearly 8 million NDEs in the world and many of the people who have experienced them admit to having an out of body experience, meaning that they (their souls) were watching themselves (their bodies) experience things and also witness things that would be impossible for that person to know without a belief in body-soul dualism.

What is a 'noseeum inference'? (b) How does it relate to the problem of evil? (c) Do you think it can be used persuasively to suggest God's non-existence? (d) Why or why not? (298-301)

a. A noseeum inference is a conclusion drawn on the basis of what one does not see. b. It suggests that if we cannot see a reason for a particular instance of evil, then there probably is not one, rendering that evil action as pointless evil.

Outline the brain/physical view of personal identity. Identify (at least) one key problem with such physicalist accounts of identity. (218-23)

a. A person at a certain time is the numerically identical person at a later time just in case she is the same brain at both times. b. Even though humans change, this belief says that if you have the same brain, you are the same person. c. The main problem that people suggest with this issue is the issue of brain fission. If you take half of someone's brain, which person are you?

Highlight the primary distinction(s) between bundle theory and the substance view with regard to particular things. (186-95)

a. Bundle Theory: Particulars are a collection of properties. Everything is a bundle of its parts. When properties change, the particular thing changes. b. Substance View: Defines particulars by reducing things to their constituent parts. The whole is the sum of its parts.

Evaluate logical positivism as both a philosophical system and a potential challenge to metaphysical thought (150-52).

a. Logical Positivism asserts that a proposition is meaningful if and only if it is empirically verifiable in principle. b. This means that there are some statements that cannot be empirically verified even in principle such as "God exists." c. Metaphysics itself can't be empirically verified. d. If one embraces a belief of Logical Positivism, their belief can't be coherent because the proposition that Logical Positivism embraces can't itself be empirically verified.

Outline Aquinas's perspective on (a) the nature of limited monarchy and (b) the roles and responsibilities of the monarch. (387-89)

a. Monarchies are governments led by one person. - There must be a higher moral standard governing the monarchs. - The government's power should be subject to the people. - A step toward Democracy. And perhaps toward Anarchy. b. Roles and responsibilities of Monarch - Monarch has positive and Negative duties. Negative: Punish those who disobey (Disciplinary) Positive: Produce educated and virtuous citizens (Education & Virtue) c. Power of the state is subject to the people's right to rebellion. - If the law required good, duty of citizens to obey. - If laws require evil, duty of citizens to disobey

Outline the two major views on the relationship between law and morality (381-84). Which one do you think is more defensible?

a. Natural Law theory - civil rights said natural law was higher than governmental law. - There is something more than just a law by the government. - There is a higher law than the law of the land. b. Legal Positivism - Government make the law and that's the only law there is. - There is nothing natural or universal about law. - Says that all legal standards are grounded in social facts, they are human conventions, and that there is no overlap between law and morality. c. Natural Law Theory is more defensible because it can more easily coincide with some aspects of Legal Positivism while Legal Positivism rejects Natural Law Theory altogether.

What is the difference between (a) negative and positive rights, and (b) moral and legal rights? (379-80)

a. Negative rights - Freedom 'to' something or freedom from interference with regard to some activity or pursuit. Positive rights - A claim to a good or service. b. Moral Rights - Rights that are transcendent to governmental law. Legal Rights - Governmental law establishes rights to the people (Right to bear arms, right to an attorney) - Moral rights can be violated, but never removed. - Some say there is no such thing as moral rights.

Outline the nominalist perspective on the existence of universals. Identify at least one pro and con of nominalism. (176-82)

a. There are no abstract categories, all are created by man. Extreme Nominalism: No properties or relations whatsoever. Moderate Nominalism: Believes that there are some abstract entities but that things are not a part of a group but instead are particulars. Pro: Falls on the side of simplicity. (Satisfies Ockham's Razor) Con: Does not answer the question why.

Outline the Platonist perspective on the existence of universals. Identify at least one pro and con of Platonism. (173-76)

a. Universals are abstract entities, not concrete of physical, they can be had by more than one thing at the same time and they exist eternally. b. Can be a property (brownness, smallness, etc.) or a Relation (owned by, taller than, sister of) c. Deals with propositions to include varying situations. Pro: It is nice to have an abstract thing to compare other things to. Con: Philosophers who believe in a solely material world can't embrace this belief.

Outline the conceptualist perspective on the existence of universals. Identify at least one pro and con of conceptualism. (182-83)

a. Views that properties and other universals are mental concepts. b. You classify things based on other concepts that you have in your mind in relation to the things you have experienced. Pro: It is a good middle ground between Platonism and Nominalism Con: This cannot explain why we group things under the same concept

In one or two (short) sentences, identify core components of (a) classical foundationalism, (b) modest foundationalism, (c) coherentism, and (d) contextualism. (82-96)

classical foundationalism: only three properly basic beliefs modest foundationalism: there are more than three properly basic beliefs coherentism: no pbbs, beliefs are justified by other beliefs (web) contextualism: knowledge/beliefs are related to a specific context

Outline the contours and points of Cowan & Spiegel's 'Complete Ethical Theory' (368-70).

i. While many practices are a matter of cultural or personal preference there are some practices that are universally right or wrong ii. It is appropriate in some instances to criticize foreign cultures such as those that practice cruelties such as female circumcision and slavery iii. While moral convictions often are linked to emotion and personal preferences our moral judgments have true value, our moral beliefs can be mistaken, and moral debate is meaningful iv. Consequences of actions do matter when making moral assessments v. Our moral obligations are vitally connected that we are rational beings an immoral actions cannot be consistently universalized vi. Human beings are ends in themselves and cannot be treated as mere means vii. Personal character is a crucial aspect of the moral life viii. God communicates morally through communication and nature including human beings ix. All living things are precious to God but human life is especially scared x. God has issued many commands in scripture that very in form, scope, and degree of importance. These commands generate moral obligations

Of the two versions of scientific realism (inductivism, falsificationism), choose one to outline, describe, and evaluate. (107-17)

inductivism: what is generally known as the scientific method observation, data gathering, generalization, hypothesis, experiment, confirmation/falsification of hypothesis, establishment of theory/law

Of the three versions of scientific non-realism (instrumentalism, Kuhnian paradigms, anarchism), choose one to outline, describe, and evaluate. (117-24)

instrumentalism: predicts and explains scientific phenomena does not prove any theories true, just shows what works this can be effective but since it does not actually prove theories it leaves little room for scientific advancement

What is methodological naturalism? Is it a suitable governing paradigm for science (132-36)?

methodological naturalism: naturalist perspective, views science without a divine perspective It uses laws of nature to justify science and does not rely on God for beliefs. It is not suitable because many things are used to describe nature that are not that of nature itself including numbers and logical rules.

Provide a tentative definition of science (your own or one of the textbook's). Highlight (at least) one strength and weakness of the definition. (103-05)

the systematic inquiry of the natural world which aims to organize, predict, and explain empirical data strength: involves inquiry and testing which is essential to science weakness: what counts as empirical data