Term
| In what way(s) was the Enlightenment revolutionary? |
|
Definition
| 17th-18th century: was revolutionary in 2 senses: political & mental (sciences) |
|
|
Term
| What are Enlightenment values and attitudes? |
|
Definition
*Old theological discussions became "out dated"
Optimism - belief in progress’ & the possibility of “man” himself securing the means of his own salvation; “man” would do this with his own reason & intellect, not with God’s help
Democracy & Liberalism - optimistic faith in science, reason, freedom, progress, & universal ed= fundamental principle of American democratic thinking (emergence of western democracy)
Universal Reason - everybody was to benefit from the enlightenment b/c everyone (except those who were insane) considered to have equal capacity of rational thinking |
|
|
Term
| Who were Enlightenment thinkers and what were their contributions to the Enlightenment? |
|
Definition
Copernicus - Heliocentric theory; goes against Ptolomaic/geocentric theory; believes earth moves around the sun in a circular orbit
Kepler - Proved Mars and all planets are in elliptical orbit w/ the sun at the focus point (his first law of planetary motion) USED MATH!
Galileo Galilei - Supported Copernicus' theory; invented telescope; threatened by church to be tortured so he had to "admit" theory was untrue
Newton - invented theory of Universal gravitation and calculus; used god to fill in gaps only where he couldn't find any reasons or scientific answers
Descartes - "I think, therefore I am"
Locke - Personal ID |
|
|
Term
| What texts were inspired by or essential to the Enlightenment? |
|
Definition
French Encyclopedie - 17 Volumes; anticlerical; edited by Diderot, Dalembert, Voltaire, Rousseau
Principia Mathematica - Newton’s foundations of gravity; inspired by a falling apple
Declaration of Independence
French dec of rights of man and the citizen
Descartes' Meditations on First Philosophy |
|
|
Term
| Who was Descartes? What did he write? |
|
Definition
rationalist; laid foundations for analytic geometry; wanted to bring philosophy back to where it was, supported with math & science; 'method of doubt';
Meditations on First Philosophy, Principles of Philosophy, Rules for the Direction of the Mind, Discourse on Method, and The Passions of the Soul |
|
|
Term
| What is Rationalism? Empiricism? |
|
Definition
rationalism - belief that reason is the prime source of knowledge and it's possible to know before experiences a priori
empiricism - all knowledge derives from experience and that all ideas trace back to sense a posteriori |
|
|
Term
| What is Descartes method? What is his goal? |
|
Definition
"Method of doubt" - he will not accept as true anything of which he cannot be absolutely certain
Goal: convinced that he must seriously undertake to rid himself of all the opinions he had previously accepted; find something that cannot be doubted |
|
|
Term
| Why does Descartes doubt? What does he doubt? What can he not doubt? |
|
Definition
Doubts everything he believes to be true (all senses of perception, past experiences, etc.) because he seeks indubitable truths—something you cannot doubt
He cannot doubt that he is a being (someone who is here, the body of a person, self, God’s existence) |
|
|
Term
| Why isn’t sense perception indubitable? |
|
Definition
| The Archimedean point - Senses are sometimes deceptive and are a mark of prudence (carefulness) to never place our complete trust in someone who has deceived us once. Sense perception is illusions and dreams and the evidence cannot be trusted |
|
|
Term
| What part do dreams play in Descartes’ first meditation? |
|
Definition
| Dreams are a sense perception. All beliefs based on sensation are subject to doubt because it might be a dream |
|
|
Term
| Why does Descartes doubt seemingly indubitable truths like 2+3=5? |
|
Definition
| Evil genius with supreme powers that puts all his efforts into deceiving him so that he is always mistaken about everything, including math. |
|
|
Term
| What is the cogito? Be familiar with the argument. |
|
Definition
I think, therefore I am. If "I" is thinking, regardless if it's true or false, there must be an "I" engaged in the activity of thinking
P1. The existence of doubt or thought implies a doubter or thinker (‘I’)
P2. Doubt or thought exists.
C1. Therefore, there exists a doubter or thinker |
|
|
Term
| What is the self according to Descartes? What does he say thinking includes? |
|
Definition
“I am a thing that thinks.(nonphysical)”
A thing that doubts, understand, affirms, denies, wills, refuses, and also imagines, and has sensations. |
|
|
Term
| What is substance dualism? What is a res cogitans? A res extensa |
|
Definition
the view that reality consists of two distinct substances: Mental and Physical.
Mental—thinking thing, soul, spirit (res cogitans); Physical—physical thing, extended substance, matter, body (res extensa) |
|
|
Term
| What is the wax example and what does it demonstrate? |
|
Definition
our senses do not tell you that it is the same wax, your understanding does. Therefore your understanding is more reliable than senses.
The senses perceive certain qualities of the wax like its hardness, smell, and so forth. But, as it is moved closer to the fire, all of these sensible qualities change. despite these changes in what the senses perceive of the wax, it is still judged to be the same wax now as before. |
|
|
Term
| What does Descartes know at the end of the first meditation? The second meditation? |
|
Definition
First Meditation—he knows nothing; worse shape
Second Meditation—he knows that he exists and that he is a thinking thing |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The view that there is no reality outside of my mind. Self is alone. |
|
|
Term
| Why does Descartes need to prove the existence of God in the third meditation? What proof for God does he offer? |
|
Definition
Because evil genius exists; if God existed, then the evil demon could not exist because God does not allow deception;
P1. I have an idea of perfection
P2. The idea must have originated from something at least as perfect
P3. That idea could not have come from me because I am imperfect. |
|
|
Term
| According to Descartes, what criterion must a “true belief” fulfill? |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| What is Interactionism and how does it pose a problem for Descartes? What is the mind-body problem? |
|
Definition
view that mental states, such as beliefs and desires, causally interact with physical states. Ex: Hammer drops on your toe (physical) causes you to feel pain (mental). Ex: Crying (physical) because you had a sad thought (mental)
Mind-Body Problem: view that "mental" phenomena are, in some respects, "non-physical" (distinct from the body). In a religious sense, it refers to the separation of body and soul.
Problem= Descartes believes that the mind and the body are 2 separate things that do not interact but this poses a problem because it is not true. The mind and the body ARE the same thing.
You cannot have a mind w/o a body vice versa |
|
|
Term
| What is Descartes solution to the mind-body problem and the problem posed by Interactionism? |
|
Definition
| Descartes believed that light rays impress subtle particles in the eyes, the image was then transmitted to the pineal gland which serves as the intermediary between mind and body. THIS IS NOT TRUE, Descartes could never prove it |
|
|
Term
| Be familiar with materialism/physicalism and how it differs from substance dualism. |
|
Definition
Materialism/Physicalism - everything exists in matter (physical) or one substance. Everything (such as phenomenons like thought) has come into existence for a physical reason.
ubstance Dualism=Made up of 2 substances: purely mental & purely physical; and they are 100% independent of each other |
|
|
Term
| What is the conservation of energy argument? What does it show? |
|
Definition
Substance dualism would seem to violate the first law of thermodynamics. Thermodynamics is the law that all energy in the universe already exists and cannot be created or destroyed. Example: I can’t use my mind to move a billiard ball.
It shows that substance dualism is wrong |
|
|
Term
| What is Parallelism and Occasionalism and how do they avoid the problem of Interactionism? |
|
Definition
idea is that God has created a pre-established harmony such that it only seems as if physical and mental events cause, and are caused by, one another (Liebnitz)
Occasionalism—all seeming interaction between the two are due to the continual intervention by God who brings about a change in each individual occasion, (God first caused one and then caused the other, but chose to regulate such behaviour in accordance with general laws of nature)
God’s intervention. Hammer hits your toe, God makes you feel pain |
|
|
Term
| What is the problem of personal identity? |
|
Definition
| Personal ID- Given all that can happen to me (aging, accidents, etc.) what sort of changes can I undergo and still be me? |
|
|
Term
| What is Theseus’ paradox? What is diachronic identity? |
|
Definition
Theseus’ paradox—Theseus’ repeatedly goes out to sea and continually returns with new parts. Somebody takes the old parts and claims he is the original owner of the ship. This person claims his old-plank ship (Hume) is his ship, not his new-plank ship (Locke).
Diachronic-Diachronic identity=going through time. On what basis do we judge this individual now (call x) to be the same as that individual then (call y). Essential properties make something that is (example— house, if you take a roof off, its not a house.) “He wasn’t himself.” |
|
|
Term
| How does Locke define the ‘self’? What is his theory of personal identity? |
|
Definition
Self as a conscous thinking thing that only extends its consciousness as far as ‘self’. I can prove that I exist because I am experiencing my consciousness but I cannot prove that you exist because I cannot experience your consciousness.
continuity criterion: as long as the changes were progressive, then they are still the same. (SHIP A, idea of ship) |
|
|
Term
| How does Locke use the terms 'man' and 'person'? |
|
Definition
Person=thinking intelligent being.
Man=the body (human animal). |
|
|
Term
| What significance does Locke’s understanding of personal identity have for accountability and legal responsibility? How does he support his theory of personal identity by using examples related to accountability and legal responsibility? How does he support his theory of personal identity by using examples related to accountability and legal responsibility? |
|
Definition
| Significance=law should not punish the man for committing the crime they should punish the person. (Being drunk, mad). If you remember something, you’re the person that did it, if you can’t remember then you’re not the “person” who did it. (blacked out) because memory (your experiences) is what defines the person |
|
|
Term
| What is the “Prince and the Cobbler” example and what does it demonstrate? |
|
Definition
| There is a prince and a cobbler. The Prince’s mind, with all his experiences and memories, is placed in the cobbler’s body. Who is this person? It is the prince because the mind defines the person. Mind=person. Body= man. |
|
|
Term
| Why and how does Reid object to Locke? |
|
Definition
Locke says, “a man can be AND AT THE SAME TIME may not be.” 3 different stages of man
If A=B & B=C then A=C but if A cant remember C then A cannot= C. This is a contradiction and therefore Reid objects. |
|
|
Term
| How does Reid define the self and what is his theory of personal identity? |
|
Definition
Common sense that we are the same person we were since we were born;
“perfect identity”= you are not identical w/ anyone but yourself. Self has perfect identity with itself b/c it never changes (can have experiences but your “identity” never changes)
“indivisible”= self is a simple thing. It cannot be split into anything more simple.
“foundation of all rights & obligations, & of all accountableness”= must establish accountability t this time in history b/c of trade (promise). How do you hold a person accountable to keep a promise (contract)? Must be able to identify them. |
|
|
Term
| How is Reid’s account similar to Locke’s? |
|
Definition
Both: dualist self has more to do with the mind than the body b/c the body changes much more drastically; both interested in finding out who is accountable;
Reid— I am not made of memories, I am the person who HAS the memories; I am not made up of consciousness but I am the subject of consciousness; Both believe there is a self and that that self persists in time |
|
|
Term
| What is the “Officer and the General” example and what does it demonstrate? |
|
Definition
Boy - flogged at young age
Became an officer - remembers his services as a young man
General - old man remembers service, does not remember flogging as a young boy
Same person though he doesn't remember |
|
|
Term
| (Hume) What are impressions and ideas? |
|
Definition
Impressions are things we witness; all our sensations, passions, and emotions as they make their first appearance in the soul.
Ideas are what we imagine; faint images of these in thinking and reasoning. They resemble each other in all respects but force and vivacity (which is impressions).
Example: RED. Your impression is you seeing the color. When you close your eyes and recall the color; that is the idea. |
|
|
Term
| How are simple impressions and simple ideas different from complex impressions and complex ideas? How are they related? Be able to identity examples of each. |
|
Definition
Simple impressions and simple ideas are merely characteristics. The complex impressions and idea are a group of these characteristics. Complex ideas correlate these characteristics into a concept.
Example: Complex—Apple (taste, smell, color=all different qualities). Simple—The color red (just the color).
Related:
You must have an impression before you have an idea.
Simple impression+ simple impression= complex impression
simple impression= simple idea
complex impression= complex idea
Simple idea + simple idea= complex idea. |
|
|
Term
| How does Hume define the ‘self’? How does this differ from Locke’s view? Reid’s view? |
|
Definition
| Hume defines the self with the Bundle Theory: that the self is nothing but a bundle of characteristics held together. The body is just a skeleton holding them together. Like a bundle of sticks, if you take away the sticks (characteristics) then you are left with nothing. This differs from Locke and Reid’s because Hume thinks there is an underlying structure. |
|
|
Term
| How are impressions and ideas related to Hume's understanding of the self? |
|
Definition
| Metaphor of a theatre—the mind is a kind of theatre, where several perceptions successively make their appearance; pass, re-pass, glide away, and mingle in an infinite variety of postures and situations |
|
|
