101 Midterm Review
2
101 Midterm Review Topics to know: Logic: Validity/soundness Philosophical definitions: Necessary and sufficient conditions Euthyphro: Euthyphro’s proposed definition of piety Socrates’ reply – the Euthyphro question Divine command theory Applying Socrates’ question to divine command theory Possible counterexamples Replies – ‘God could never do that’ ‘If God willed it, it would be right’, and their problems Epistemology Traditional definition of knowledge and its motivations Inferential vs. non-inferential justification; Principle of inferential justification Foundationalism The epistemic regress argument for foundationalism Descartes: Method of Doubt; applying the method Evil Genius What fails Cogito and other foundations Hume: Empiricism A priori/A posteriori Problem of Induction (and possible replies and why they don’t work) Scope of problem of induction (Hume’s general skepticism about justified matter of fact beliefs beyond the foundations)
description
Midterm Review for 101
Transcript of 101 Midterm Review
101 Midterm Review
Topics to know:
Logic:Validity/soundnessPhilosophical definitions: Necessary and sufficient conditions
Euthyphro:Euthyphros proposed definition of pietySocrates reply the Euthyphro question
Divine command theoryApplying Socrates question to divine command theoryPossible counterexamplesReplies God could never do that If God willed it, it would be right, and their problems
EpistemologyTraditional definition of knowledge and its motivationsInferential vs. non-inferential justification; Principle of inferential justificationFoundationalism The epistemic regress argument for foundationalism Descartes:Method of Doubt; applying the methodEvil GeniusWhat failsCogito and other foundationsHume:EmpiricismA priori/A posterioriProblem of Induction (and possible replies and why they dont work)Scope of problem of induction (Humes general skepticism about justified matter of fact beliefs beyond the foundations)
EthicsMoral Realism/Moral relativism (cultural relativism and subjectivism)Argument from disagreement (and problems)Argument from tolerance (and problems)Problems for relativism (seemingly implausible consequences)UtilitarianismConsequentialism vs. Deontological viewsApplying utilitarianism to particular cases Possible counterexamples to Utilitarianism, and possible replies Kant Why consequences dont matter and only intentions do Hypothetical vs. Categorical imperatives, and why moral rules must be categorical The categorical imperative: What it means, and how to apply it Categorical imperative vs. golden rule
Essay questions may look something like this:
In the regress argument for Foundationalism, what are the (4) sorts of possible supporting chains of inference for belief B (chains where all the inferences are (are not) good is not one of the sorts)? Why must every chain be of (at least) one of these types? For each sort of chain that (according to the argument) cannot provide justification for B, explain why not.
What is the difference between maximizing and satisficing Utilitarianism? Why might one think the satisficing version is more plausible? Why might one think the satisficing version is (somewhat) problematic?
