Reference no: EM132049584

First Exam Study Guide (answers available in lecture notes on Webct)

Lecture 1: What is Philosophy?*

1. What is the etymological meaning of the word ‘philosophy'?

2. What are some of the ways that philosophy differs from other disciplines?

3. What are some of the questions which have endured within philosophy since the medieval period?

4. What is ethics?

5. What is ‘meta-ethics'?

6. What is ‘metaphysics'?

7. What is ‘epistemology'?

8. What is logic?

9. What are ‘first principles' or ‘basic assumptions'?

Lecture 2: Intro. To Logic

10. Name some self-contradictory statements (at least two) and why they contradict themselves.

11. *What is the principal of non-contradiction?

12. What is the ‘anatomy' of an argument?

13. *What are conditional statements and why do philosophers use them?

14. What are the two main types of argument, and how do they work?

15. What does it mean to say that an argument is ‘valid'?

16. What does it mean to say that an argument is ‘sound'?

17. What is a ‘cogent' argument?

18. *What are necessary and sufficient conditions?

Lecture 3: The Pre-Socratics

19. Who was the first philosopher (in ‘the west' anyway), and what question was he trying to answer?

20. *What are the two primary Pre-Socratic questions?

21. What did the Pythagoreans believe that all was composed of?

22. What view did the Pythagoreans have of the soul, which later greatly influenced Plato?

23. *What did Heraclitus say about the state of everything, as opposed to what Parmenides said about it? Give their opposing positions in your own words.

Lecture 4: The Apology of Socrates

24. What was Socrates on trial for? What were the two main accusations leveled at him?

25. What were Socrates' own reasons behind his ‘calling' as a philosopher?

26. What does Socrates claim that his own wisdom consists of?

27. *When accused of searching into things in the heavens and in the earth below, Socrates responds that these are not his interests. Such questions were those of the Pre-Socratics, and were known as ‘natural philosophy.'

Toward what main question does Socrates turn the course of philosophy after him, and with which branch of philosophy is it concerned?

Lectures 6 & 7: Plato's Phaedo

28. *What is the ‘argument from imperfection,' and for what is it arguing? (74-76). Explain in your own words.

29. *What is the ‘Nature of soul' argument, and for what is it arguing? (78). Explain in your own words.

30. *What is ‘the Argument for Immortality Using Form-Bringers'? (103D-106e). Explain in your own words.

Lecture 8: Plato's Theaetetus

31. *At 151d-e, Theaetetus offers a preliminary definition of the concept in question, but Socrates claims that this definition resembles that of a famous (infamous?) sophist. Who is this sophist, and what is his theory about the concept in question?

32. In his preliminary objections to this sophist's view, Socrates wonders why not just exchange his definition with animals such as pig or baboon. Why does Socrates make this claim, and what is he trying to imply by it?

33. In his first major argument, Socrates attempts to show that this sophist's claim is self-refuting. Give at least one reason why it is.

34. What is the ‘argument from experts' (171d-172c, 177c-179b) and how is it further strengthened when the expertise in question also involves future prediction, as it does in doctors, meteorologists, etc?

35. How does the concept of ‘Heracliteanfluxism,' which Plato believes to be true of the material world, provide an argument against the sophist's view of the concept in question?

Drefcinski, Craig and Moreland on Relativism

Summarize Drefcinski, Craig and Moreland's critique of relativism. Recall the distinction between ‘descriptive relativity' and normative/ethical/moral/prescriptive relativism. Recall the fallacy involved in moving from a mere description to an ethical prescription. Recall Drefcinski's five arguments against cultural relativism in particular.

Extra credit is available for outlining the difference between the epistemological humility of acknowledging one's limited perspective versus the ontological denial of facts independent of human experience.