Introduction to Philosophy

Phi150 A

MIDTERM

Answer any ten of the fifteen questions below.

1. Explain the difference between Mythos and Logos in early Greek thought.

Mythos is narrative stories about gods to account for the way things are today. They tend to be conservative. Mythos did not imply, as it does in most cases today, a lack of validity or truth. Logos, which meant both word and logic, explained things without recourse to divine intervention, and attempted to give natural causes to explain natural phenomena. It eventually became science.

2. What were Zeno's paradoxes originally intended to show?

They were intended to show that movement is impossible; for the benefit of Parmenides, Zeno of Elias's teacher. The larger issue involved is ontological: if movement is possible, that would imply that there is such a thing as nothingness (since a moving arrow moves from where it was to where it is now, which would indicate that there is nothing where it was the moment before. Movement, like change, is a mixture of being and nothingness. Stability has more being than change.

3. Although we now know Thales' theory that everything is water to be false, there are certain underlying affinities between Thales's theory and the manner in which
modern science proceeds. Point out those affinities.

a) There must be some one underlying thing (substance, element) that is common to all things, otherwise it would be impossible to explain change.

b) It separates the multiplicity of appearances from some underlying sameness.

c) It presents a reasonable hypothesis, based on inductive reasoning.

Comment: The status of this "Urstoff" is different from that of a "thing." It is more like an element. This level of reflection has not yet attained the ability of abstraction necessary to posit some entity (such as "matter") that had no qualities itself. It is the "emblematic" reuse of an object to explain all objects.

4. Why did the oracle at Delphi say Socrates was the wisest of men?

Because he knew that he didn't know, whereas most men think they do know. This first step (the recognition of one's ignorance) is a vital first step in the Socratic road to knowledge.

5. Explain Plato's Myth of the Cave in your own words.

Prisoners are chained in a cave so that they can only face the wall, can't see the source of the figures that are projected in front of them. These figures are actually produced by the light from a fire, in front of which people are carrying objects on their heads. The bodies of the people carrying the objects are hidden by a low wall. The prisoners take "appearances" for "reality." One prisoner is forced to go to out of the cave, and along the entrance path that goes upward toward the light of the sun. His eyes are so bedazzled by the light of reality that he returns. When he tells the other prisoners of their delusion, they become angry and kill him. The cave shows that we must make the journey to the upper realm of true reality, the world of ideal forms.

6. Explain what was at stake in the late medieval controversy between the realists and the nominalists.

The realists thought that universals really exist, while realists thought they were just convenient names of categories, valid only for subjective human beings. The Catholic church eventually opted for the realist position.

7. What is the role of teleology in the philosophy of Aristotle?

Teleology, the notion that things tend toward the realization of a an innate purpose, is vital to Aristotle's entire system. Things move toward their realization, attaining their potential. This sort of thinking today is confined to the explanation of human behavior (and that of animals; possible of life forms); Aristotle thought heavy things sought the lower levels because it was part of their nature to do so.

8. Give any version of the ontological argument for the existence of God.

a) (Anselm) God is that than which nothing greater can be imagined. If we imagine God as existing in the human mind only, a god that would exist both within and without the human mind would be greater. Therefore God exists both within and without the human mind.

b) God is perfect. Therefore he cannot lack any quality. If He lacked existence, He would lack a quality. Therefore God exists. (This is a somewhat stream-lined version of the preceding.

c) (Descartes) I am imperfect. I can only know that I am imperfect if I have the idea of perfection. My idea of perfection must be caused by something perfect. Nothing can be more perfect than its cause, and nothing in my experience is perfect enough to have caused the idea of perfection in my mind. Therefore a perfect being (God) put the idea of perfection in my mind. Therefore God exists.

Comment: Kant subsequently refutes the logic of (a) and (b) by arguing that existence is not a quality to be predicated of a subject, but implied in their being a subject.

9. Explain the significance of Galileo's discovery that Jupiter had four moons.

The church still held the notion that the universe was geocentric, for dogmatic reasons. The Garden of Eden was at the center of the universe. But it drew some reassurance from the fact that the moon rotates around the earth, thus showing its obeisance to earth. Galileo's discovery of Jupiter's four moons tended to weaken the Church's already lame argument for a geocentric universe.

10. What is the meaning of "I think, therefore I am," and why is it central to Descartes project?

Descartes set out to arrive at an Archimedean point, a point of absolute certainty. He proceeded therefore to doubt everything he could: "De omnibus dubitandum," everthing is to be doubted. But as he was doubting it occurred to him that he was thinking, and if he was thinking he must exist.

11. Give as accurate an account as you can of Cartesian dualism. What are its strengths and weaknesses?

Descartes divided the world into two finite substances: res cogitans, or mind, and res extensa or the world of extended physical objects. Although he did not originate this distinction, he formalized it. It does seem to explain two basic sorts of being, but it raises the problem of interaction. How could mind influence body or body mind (as they seem to do, when, e.g., a physical accident can end the life of the mind, or a mental state affects our physical state)? Descartes surmised that the two met in the pineal gland, located in his estimation at the center of the brain. But since this is a physical organ, it seems unlikely that this could work, even in principle.

12. Specify the difference between analytic and synthetic statements (i.e. between what Hume called "relations of ideas" versus "matters of fact"), and give two examples of each.

Analytic statements are relations of ideas, they are a priori, i.e. before experience, and they are true by definition. They tend to be tautological. They are necessary, and their negations are contradictions. Synthetic statements or matters of fact are statements about the world, the truth of which can only be established by experience with the real world. They are therefore a posteriori and contingent. Their negations are not contradictory. Examples of the former are: All triangles have three angles, all brothers are siblings, circles are round, either it is Monday or it is not Monday, etc. All mathematical truths are analytic. Examples of the latter are: George is late this morning, it is chilly in this room, the cat is on the mat, Clinton is the present president of the United States, and the American Revolution broke out in 1776.

13. Explain the following terms in your own words: (a) solipsism, (b) tautology, (c) epistemology, (d) intersubjectivity, (e) ontology. [If you choose to answer question 13, you will be given partial credit for each element answered correctly.

Solipsism: I am the only one who exists. Tautology: a truism, something that is obviously the case. Epistemology, theory of knowledge. Intersubjectivity, the collectivity of subjectivities. Ontology, the study of being.

14. Explain how Kant was able to assert that there are such things as synthetic a priori truths.

Kant propounded that the forms of intuition, temporality and spatiality, are a priori because we do not discover these in the outer world, and yet synthetic because they do pertain to the real world. The categories of the understanding (causality, necessity, substance, etc.) were considered a priori synthetic truths as well. These were not exactly the same as "innate ideas" however, because they were considered as preconditions of all experience.

15. Explain, with examples, Kant's notion of the categorical imperative.

The categorical imperative is the basis of Kant's ethical philosophy, which he develops in the second critique (The Critique of Practical Reason). It posits that we should act in such a way that we could wish this were a universal maxim for all people. If, for example, I were to steal something, I could only do so if I wanted all people to steal. But stealing is tributary to (dependent on) the existence of private property, because without it there would be nothing to steal. If stealing were a universal practice, there would be no private property, hence no stealing. A universal maxim to kill one's neighbor would end up in the same contradiction, and is therefore prohibited by Kant's categorical imperative.

# posted by Michael @ 6:29 PM