Final Exam Review Philosophy-an unanswered question Metaphysics-above and beyond physics Ethics-a system of general moral principle

and a conception of morality and its foundation, or the study of moral principles. Plato/Theory of Forms- An independently existing entity in the world of Being, which determines the nature of the particular things of this world. In Aristotle forms have no independent existence. Materialism- The metaphysical view that only physical matter and its properties exist. Such intangible entitles as numbers, minds and ideas are really properties of physical bodies. To talk about energy, for example, is, in a way, to talk about physical potential; to talk about minds is, as a kind of shorthand, to talk about behavior; to talk about ideas is, in a misleading way, to talk about the various structures and interrelationship between objects. Numbers have no existence of their own but only represent sets of sets of objects (the set of all sets of eight things is the number eight, for example). Materialism has always been a powerful worldview in modern scientific culture. It is also the most common view among the pre-Socrates philosophers. Determinism-the view that every event in the universe is dependent upon other events, which are its causes.on this view, all human actions and decisions, even those which we would normally describe as free and undetermined, are totally dependent on prior events that cause them. Dualism- in general, the distinction between mind and body as separate substances, or very different kinds of states and events with radically different properties. Hume's Theory of Self and Epistemology Self HYPERLINK "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Hume" \o "David Hume" David Hume pointed out that we tend to think that we are the same person we were five years ago. Though we have changed in many respects, the same person appears present as was present then. We might start thinking about which features can be changed without changing the underlying self. Hume, however, denies that there is a distinction between the various features of a person and the mysterious self that supposedly bears those features. When we start introspecting, "we are never intimately conscious of anything but a particular perception; man is a bundle or collection of different perceptions which succeed one another with an inconceivable rapidity and are in perpetual flux and movement". It is plain, that in the course of our thinking, and in the constant revolution of our ideas, our imagination runs easily from one idea to any other that resembles it, and that this quality alone is to the fancy a sufficient bond and association. It is likewise evident that as the senses, in changing their objects, are necessitated to change them regularly, and take them as they lie contiguous to each other, the imagination must by long custom acquire the same method of thinking, and run along the parts of space and time in conceiving its objects." On Hume's view, these perceptions do not belong to anything. Rather, Hume compares the soul to a commonwealth, which retains its identity not by virtue of some enduring core substance, but by being composed of many different, related, and yet constantly changing elements. The question of personal identity then becomes a matter of characterizing the loose cohesion of one's personal experience. No empirical basis for belief in self. Bundle theory of self, strung together by memories. Epistemology A. Humes Fork- Humes insistence that every belief be justified either as a relation between ideas or as a matter of fact.Hume starts as an empiricist and becomes a skeptic. Anything worth knowing will be confirmed or disconfirmed by the senses. Relations of Ideas- rationalism, bad, trivial, uninformative. 2+2=4. A bachelor is an unmarried man. Matters of Fact- Empiricism, Good. There are Bachelors in this room. Caf on the square is at least 4 blocks away.

B. Analysis of Causation-correlation: not as strong as causation, statistical frequency. Causation: necessary for one to the other. Every event has a cause, A causes B. 1. Our senses only establish a sequence of events (pool ball hitting another) 2. Sequence in and of itself doesnt establish belief in cause and effect. Use induction to establish the belief. 3. What is the justification in belief of induction? (Assumed, presupposed, never proven) C. Humean Skepticism-no empirical basis in the belief in cause and effect.

Utilitarianism-act in ways to make the greatest number of people as happy as possible

Functionalism-the view that the mind is the product of a pattern in the brain, as in a computer, rather than a product of the matter of the brain as such. Kant's Moral Theory (AKA Kantianism)-wrong and right, do what is morally right

Kant's Epistemology- Revision of Humes Fork-instead of relations of ideas Kant believed in Analytic, A Priori, and Necessary. And instead of matters of fact Kant believed in Synthetic, A Posteriori, and Contingent. Synthetic A Priori truth, parallel lines dont intersect. Every event has a cause, Hume Rejected this because there was no empirical evidence; Kant faculty of understanding was not true by definition. The capability of the mind knows things. We know A Priori that things happen; Hume says we cannot know about cause and effect but Kant says yes you can he is a rationalist. Kant says you cannot figure out the world its different. People see the world differently. A human has this ability but how we perceive it may be different. Synthetic A Priori Knowledge-An informative Statement about reality the truth of which is known independently of experience. Not all knowledge claims are this but some are; how is this possible? Kants theories of mind (coming to know things.)

C. Kants Faculties-Intuition (perception, space, time): space and time is only what allows you to make perceptions. Understanding (relation, unity, plurality, totally): Hume is a strict empiricist, show me time; not physicalKant we impose it. D. Noumena and Phenomena-there is a world and out mind wont look at anything but perception (as they appear to us- phenomena). We take in the world and our mind gives it shape.

Fatalism- Thesis that everything will happen no matter what. Compatibilism-the thesis that both determinism (on some interpretations)and free action can be true. Determinism does not rule out free action and the possibility of free action does not require that determinism be false. They are compatible positions. Ethical Egoism-the thesis that people ought to act in their own interests. Identity Theory (AKA Reductive Materialism)- The thesis that the mind and brain are ontologically one and the same, or, more accurately, that mental states and events are in fact certain brain and nervous system processes. The theory is usually presented as a form of materialism, but it is important to emphasize that, unlike many materialistic theories, it does not deny the existence of mental events. It denies only that they have independent existence. Mental events are nothing other than certain bodily events.

Eliminative Materialism- The thesis that increasing knowledge of neurology eventually will allow us to give up our folk psychological terminology of mental states. Locke's Theory of Self- The omniscience thesis seems even less plausible than the unrestricted infallibility thesis. But consider the following passage from Locke, which seems to express an omniscience claim. [It is] impossible for anyone to perceive, without perceiving that he does perceive. When we see, hear, smell, taste, feel, meditate, or will anything, we know that we do so. Is Locke really saying that all of our thoughts and sensations are accompanied by (justified, true) beliefs to the effect that we are having those thoughts and sensations? It is more likely that by we know that we do so Locke means that we are conscious that we do so. This statement is plausible if we assume that states of perceiving, willing, etc. are conscious, and that conscious states are states one is conscious of. Self is your memories and former experiences

Theodicy- an attempt to defend god from the argument from evil. Free Will Theodicy-among philosophers a somewhat antiquated expression that means that a person is capable of making decisions that are not determined by antecedent conditions, such as what a person wants, what a person believes, but free will means that such considerations never determine a persons decision. At most the enter into the decision. Evil exists because we choose it. Contrast Theodicy-evil cannot exist without good, god cannot exist without evil, and you cannot have one without the other. Soul-Making Theodicy-evil exists so that we may have opportunities to make our souls. Omniscience-all knowing usually said of god. Omnipotence-all powerful, usually said of God Omnibenevolence-want to get rid of evil/ all good. Problem of Evil-the dilemma that emerges from trying to reconcile te belief that god is omnipotent,omniscient, and just with the suffering and evil in the world. Argument from Evil- if god is omnipotent(all powerful),Omniscient(all knowing),and Omnibenevolent (all good) but evil still exists, then god must lack at least one of these 3 attributes. Moral Skepticism-rejects objectivity of moral claims Moral Nihilism-no such thing as wrong and right Non-Cognitivism-aka emotivism.moral claims are neither true by definition nor empirically verifiable, they express emotions Ethical Subjectivism-moral truths depend on the person Ethical Relativism- the thesis that different moralities should be considered equally correct even if they directly contradict each other. A morality is correct by this thesis merely if it is correct according to the particular society that accepts it.

Descartes' EpistemologyA. Hyperbolic Doubt-His basic strategy was to consider false any belief that falls prey to even the slightest doubt. This hyperbolic doubt then serves to clear the way for what Descartes considers to be an unprejudiced search for the truth. This clearing of his previously held beliefs then puts him at an epistemological ground-zero. From here Descartes sets out to find something that lies beyond all doubt. He eventually discovers that I exist is impossible to doubt and is, therefore, absolutely certain. It is from this point that Descartes proceeds to demonstrate Gods existence and that God cannot be a deceiver. This, in turn, serves to fix the certainty of everything that is clearly and distinctly understood and provides the epistemological foundation Descartes set out to find. Doubt everything which can be doubted. Assume for sake of argument everything is false, in an effort to achieve certainty. B. Cartesian Skepticism-doubting the external world, the world outside your own mind. 1. Senses-are reliable typically visual; so how can I be certain which are reliable or not. 2. Dreams-can seem real; how do I know if I am dreaming or awake? 3. Evil Genius/brain in a vat- matrix scenario. It is possible something outside of me is making me believe, false reality. C. Descartes Rationalism-Cogito, Ergo Sum-I think, therefore I am. I can doubt who I am, where I am, I cannot doubt that I am. (Cartesian circle-self, god, external world) Rationalism-Knowledge through reason Empiricism-Knowledge through experiences Skepticism-Value judgments, politicians, scientific theories or claims, talking to god and god talking back.Absolute Skepticism-we cant know anything(no one can be this) Philosophical Skepticism- there is very little we can know. Conspiracy theory; Descartes proposed that he wanted to have certainty (suspension of belief). One question from Aesthetics lecture One question from Humor lecture