Term
|
Definition
| The stuff the universe is made of. The fundamental stuff of life. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Fire; everything is in constant flux. Same river twice. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Being; change is impossible. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| They believed that there was no truth and that truth wasn't the end of an argument - winning was. |
|
|
Term
| What do the Rationalists believe? |
|
Definition
| Truth comes from within. We have innate knowledge. |
|
|
Term
| What did the Empericists believe? |
|
Definition
| Reason/Sense experience is the only way we can gain knowledge/truth. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The interior is the realm of the senses and the exterior is the intelligible realm. |
|
|
Term
| What did Aristotle think about the realms (sense/intelligible)? |
|
Definition
| There is only one realm and the forms are in the particulars. Innate ability, not innate knowledge. |
|
|
Term
| According to Hume, what are Relations of Ideas? |
|
Definition
| Their contraries are inconceivable. Their denial is self-contradictory. |
|
|
Term
| According to Hume, what are Matters of Fact? |
|
Definition
| Their contraries are conceivable. There is no contradiction in their denial. |
|
|
Term
| Ontology is part of which branch of philosophy? |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| What is the most recent proposal for answering the question of the Arche? |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| Who were Descartes's opponents in the Meditations? |
|
Definition
| The scholastics and the skeptics. |
|
|
Term
| The study of knowledge is known as...? |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| Who said this: He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| Definition: Prescriptive statement |
|
Definition
| Recommends a course of action. |
|
|
Term
| Definition: Descriptive statement |
|
Definition
| Describes the way things are |
|
|
Term
| According to Hume, on what are our beliefs in casual connections ultimately grounded? |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| Philosophy can be understood as: |
|
Definition
| an activity that involves seeking understanding, thinking critically, and asking fundamental questions. |
|
|
Term
| Some Questions in Meta-ethics: |
|
Definition
What is the nature of moral claims?
Are they objective?
Are they such that they can be true or false?
Can moral prescriptions be genuinely followed? |
|
|
Term
| Some questions in Normative Ethics: |
|
Definition
What are general principles by which we can determine whether an action is right or wrong?
Is it the act that is to be evaluated, or is it the outcome? |
|
|
Term
| Some questions in Applied Ethics: |
|
Definition
Is animal testing right or wrong?
Is abortion right or wrong?
Is cloning right or wrong? |
|
|
Term
| What is believed by Psychological Egoists? |
|
Definition
| Ultimately, humans are incapable of acting unselfishly. |
|
|
Term
| According to Hobbes, what's behind some altruistic acts? |
|
Definition
Charity = a demonstration of our power.
Pity = fear for ourselves. |
|
|
Term
| What are some responses against Psychological Egoism? |
|
Definition
Just because an outcome of an action may be beneficial in some sense to the person engaging in the action, it does not mean that the beneficial outcome was the motivation of the action.
A selfish person would have peace of mind without helping others. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
"X is right" = I approve of X.
"X is wrong" = I disapprove of X. |
|
|
Term
| Sophisticated Subjectivism (Emotivism)? |
|
Definition
"X is right" = Yay X!
"X is wrong" = Boo X! |
|
|
Term
| Responses against Simple Subjectivism? |
|
Definition
As long as one is being honest about their feelings, our moral claims are always true.
Fails to capture the nature of ethical disagreement. Two people in disagreement over an action are talking about two different things, what each of them feels. |
|
|
Term
| Responses against Emotivism? |
|
Definition
Impossible to ever make a false moral claim.
Intolerance cannot be wrong in any genuine sense.
Cannot account for our practice of offering reasons. |
|
|
Term
| Cultural Relativism (study anthropology) |
|
Definition
Premise: Different cultures have different moral codes.
Conclusion: There is no objective truth in morality. Right and wrong are only matters of opinion and opinion vary from culture to culture. |
|
|
Term
| An Objectivist's (Rachels) Diagnosis of Subjectivism: |
|
Definition
- Subjectivism notes that either there are objective moral facts or moral values are nothing more than subjective feelings and it opts for the latter.
-But this overlooks a third possibility: Moral truths could be moral claims that are backed by the best reasons. |
|
|
Term
| Mill's thesis and premises: |
|
Definition
Thesis: We should actively seek positions that conflict with, and arguments directed against, our own views.
1. Any silenced opinion might be true.
2. Alternative beliefs might be partly true, and can supplement our view to bring us toward more truth.
3. Our unchallenged views, even if true, are unjustified, therefore dead.
4. Our unchallenged beliefs lack meaning and vitality; they’re no longer alive within us. |
|
|
Term
| What is Descartes’ primary objective in the First Meditation? |
|
Definition
| To doubt all that can possibly be doubted. He is looking for the ultimate degree of doubt, in hopes of finding something that remains, something cannot possibly be doubted. |
|
|
Term
| What are some of the specific ‘thought experiments’ Descartes employs in order to achieve his objective? |
|
Definition
-He assumes that he is dreaming, thus, that his senses are deceptive.
- He later assumes that there is an evil genius misleading him in all his reasoning, including even mathematical reasoning. |
|
|
Term
| What is that of which Descartes can be certain? |
|
Definition
| That he exists. Because even in doubting all of his beliefs, he is still doubting. Doubting -- or more generally, thinking -- is occurring. In order to doubt/think, he must exist. |
|
|
Term
| Hume's thesis and argument: |
|
Definition
Thesis: We have no rational grounds for believing one event causes another (or for believing our ‘best’ predictions). We believe such things out of habit/custom only.
1. Objects of inquiry can be divided into two types, matters of fact and relations of ideas.
2. Matters of fact cannot be known without sense experience.
3. Our beliefs regarding matters of fact beyond present and past data are based on the identification of causal connections.
4. We cannot identify causal connections without sense experience, ie., by pure reason.
5. Nor, however, does our sense experience give us access to causal connections. We may have access to the sensory properties of various events, but nowhere do we have access to some extra property we can call a causal connection. |
|
|
Term
| 4 problems with Omnibenevolence (anything He wills is automatically good/right): |
|
Definition
1. God is good is meaningless, it really means that god's commands are commanded by God.
2. God's goodness is arbitrary.
3. He'd be praised for doing the absolute opposite, so he is not worthy of praise.
4. It makes him a tyrant. |
|
|
Term
| What is another understanding of omnibenevolence that most theists use? |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| Give the ontological argument: |
|
Definition
1. God is the greatest conceivable being.
2. It is better to exist.
3. Since god is the greatest conceivable being and it is greater to exist, then anytime we're thinking of something that does not exist, we are not thinking of god.
4. God must exist. |
|
|
Term
| What is a contingent being? |
|
Definition
| A contingent being depends on something else for it's existence and it's non-existence is conceivable. |
|
|
Term
| What is a non-contingent being? |
|
Definition
| A non-contingent being is self-existent and it's nonexistence is impossible. |
|
|
Term
| Give the argument from contingency: |
|
Definition
1. We see many contingent things.
2. Each of these contingent things depend on each other.
3. Either the world consists solely of contingent things, or there is a non-contingent thing.
4. The world cannot consist solely of contingent things.
5. Therefore, there must be a non-contingent thing which we call God. |
|
|
Term
| What is the principle of sufficient reason? |
|
Definition
| Every event can, in principle, be explained. |
|
|
Term
| What is the principle of sufficient reason? |
|
Definition
| Every event can, in principle, be explained. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Analyzes/scrutinizes ethical theories. |
|
|
Term
| What are Ethical theories? |
|
Definition
| They propose ethical standards. |
|
|
Term
| What are ethical standards? |
|
Definition
| They are standards used to evaluate moral actions. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Moral actions are such that they are right or wrong. |
|
|
Term
| What are the 2 fundamental concerns in Ethics? |
|
Definition
Actions: evaluated as right or wrong.
Situations/Outcomes: evaluated as good or bad. |
|
|
