PHI 107 Week 7 of notes
PHI 107 Week 7 of notes PHI 107
Popular in Theories/Knowldge&Reality
verified elite notetaker
Popular in Department
This 2 page Bundle was uploaded by Nia Gibson on Saturday March 19, 2016. The Bundle belongs to PHI 107 at Syracuse University taught by R. Muckle in Summer 2015. Since its upload, it has received 21 views.
Reviews for PHI 107 Week 7 of notes
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 03/19/16
PHI 107 Consequence Argument 1. We cannot change the Laws of Nature 2. We cannot Change the Past 3. I cannot change the Laws of Nature and the past 4. If determinism is true, then my present is a necessary consequence of the past + Laws of Nature. 5. There is nothing I can do now to change the fact that my present actions are a necessary consequence of the past and the Laws of Nature. 6. There is nothing I can do to change my present actions 7. If 6, then I have no ability to do otherwise Rule A: there is nothing anyone can do to change what is necessarily true. Rule B: If there is nothing anyone can do to change ‘X’ and nothing anyone can do to change the fact that ‘Y’ is a necessary consequence of ‘X’, there is nothing anyone can do to change ‘Y’ Can’t change ‘X’ Can’t change ‘X’, Then ‘Y’ Can’t change ‘Y’ PHI 107 March 3, 2016 Rational egoist somebody that reasons out that the best thing to do in a certain circumstance is always in their own favor Professor Plum kills Ms.White for rationally egoist reasons Case 1: Professor Plum is created by wacky neuroscientist philosophers. Otherwise he’s typical WPN manipulate him to reason rational egoistically in this case, and so he decides to kill Ms.White. Case 2: Like Case 1 WPN creates PP, they manipulate him before birth to usually,but not always, reason rational egoistically he does in this case Case 3: PP is an ordinary human born into a culture of rational egoist. By house and community he is causally determined to reason as a rational egoist in this case. So he does. Case 4: Determinism is true. PP is casually determined to reason rational egoistically, to kill MW and he does. Indeterminism: Past and Laws of Nature are compatible with or greater than the future Event Causation
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'