Final Exam Study Guide
Final Exam Study Guide PHI 2010
Popular in Introduction to Philosophy
verified elite notetaker
Popular in PHIL-Philosophy
verified elite notetaker
This 5 page Study Guide was uploaded by Valerie Segebre on Monday April 25, 2016. The Study Guide belongs to PHI 2010 at Florida State University taught by John Schwenkler in Spring 2016. Since its upload, it has received 203 views. For similar materials see Introduction to Philosophy in PHIL-Philosophy at Florida State University.
Reviews for Final Exam Study Guide
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: 04/25/16
Final Exam Study Guide for Multiple Choice Section There are certain aspects of friendship that make it questionable in a philosophical or ethical context. This is the partiality aspect of friendship, or why we are partial (in favor) to our friends in terms of how we act, feel, and think towards them. Special objects such as heirlooms (let’s say your grandmother’s necklace) are also specific in love because if we lose them we don’t want a new one just like it, we want that specific object/necklace. (People give objects meanings). Similarly, if your friend had a twin, your friend would still not be able to be replaced by their twin because friends are not “fungible”; that is, they are not able to be replaced by someone identical, unlike money. We are attracted to our friends (Greek word for this kind of love is philia) based on similar personality traits such as similar taste in music and hobbies as well as in characteristics we find honorable in them, like being trustworthy. According to Aristotle, friends make an integral part of a happy life. Aristotle discusses friendship based in pleasure, virtue, and utility. 1. Pleasure (doing things you have in common like sports) 2. Utility (caring for each other’s happiness because friendship is beneficial – think having support for your dream and then supporting your friend’s dream too and wishing him well) 3. Virtue (superior to the other two forms of friendship) There are six traits of a perfect friendship in Aristotle’s opinion: 1. It exists only between the virtuous 2. Being honestly interested in friend’s well-being 3. They last as long as the people are good and being good is in their nature so it should last long 4. They are useful (friends are supposed to nurture one another) 5. They are pleasant because friendship itself is good and because people like hanging out around like-minded people 6. They are truly one-of-a-kind (rare) and take a while to develop Sarah Stroud introduces the concept of partiality, referring to being positively biased towards our friends, especially when it comes to people saying bad things about our friends and standing up for them. Philosopher Sarah Stroud thinks that we should be partial to our friends because we know them and became friends with them because of their good qualities so we must commit and be loyal to them. If somebody says something bad about your friend it’s not that you refuse to believe the accuser automatically but that you interpret what they are saying differently. The problem with identity is: what accounts for a person’s identity/continued existence over a period of time? Locke’s view of personal identity is that a person’s identity over time depends on his or her memory/consciousness. Here we have a scenario with a scientist claiming he made a machine that can switch the identity of two people and asks two participants to choose who they would like for him to give money and who torture (or a smaller sum of money if you would like the scenario to be less intense) after using the machine. If you are a person that believes identity is based on the body, then you think that the machine won’t change who you are and therefore you chose to have the sum of money and not get tortured (person B gets the torture). If you are wrong and the machine actually switches your mind/soul to the body of person B, then based on the initial choice you made, you will be unpleasantly surprised to feel yourself being tortured (or given the smaller sum of money). If you are a person that believes identity is based on the mind/soul, then you think that the machine really will switch your identity to the body of person B and therefore you choose to give the sum of money to person B) and yourself (current body) to get tortured. If you are right and the machine does switch your mind/soul to the body of person B, then based on the initial choice you made, you get the sum of money and the other person gets the torture (or the smaller sum of money). Williams believes that we should identify ourselves with our own memories and not with our bodies. Examples of numerical identity: FSU is the same school that was once a college for women The classroom we meet in is the same classroom we met in the first day of classes Personal identity examples Bruce Wayne is Batman Christian Bale is the actor who played Bruce Wayne/Batman in The Dark Knight trilogy Clark Kent is Superman Two things are identical if they share all their characteristics in common Someone’s identity is the kind of person he or she understands himself or herself to be in the most fundamental sense, such as core beliefs, background, vocation, etc. Two things are identical if they are not two things but rather one (two concepts of one same thing). Why is personal identity important to know? Because of social practices and attitudes that a certain person deserves based on whether he or she is the one that did or did not do a thing: Praise and blame Love and hate Fear and anticipation Locke’s view of personal identity: If person x remembers doing something then he or she is the person who did it. So according to Locke, if a suspect of a crime says he doesn’t remember ever killing anybody then he didn’t since our identity depends on our memories; however, he thinks we should still put him in jail because he might be lying. Nagel’s main point in his argument about consciousness is that science is unable to give us a whole account of the nature of bats and other conscious organisms. Scientific understanding involves removing subjective qualities of something and seeing in just an objective manner. While we can learn a lot about the nature of perception through science, completely understanding is particularly difficulty concerning the nature subjective nature of conscious experience (science is limited). Think of a deaf person (from birth) deeply studying the auditory system still never truly knowing what it is like to hear. The main claim of Churchland’s essay is that the problem of consciousness is no more difficult than the many problems in neuroscience. Churchland supports her arguments with examples from the history of biology, current science, and the history of astronomy. The “hard problem” is the problem of consciousness (what it’s like and subjectivity) and problems in neuroscience such as how does attention work, how do we process language, can animals think, how are auditory signals processed, how do animals act on their instinct, and homeostasis are labeled the “easy problem.” The easy problem is referred to as easy in terms of how those questions can be solved (objectively/scientifically). The hard problem is referred to as hard because we don’t know how to solve it. Churchland disagrees and believes they are both equally difficult. Just because there is little scientific evidence doesn’t mean we should dismiss utilizing science she thinks. To her, we shouldn’t use ignorance as a premise. The Monkey Business Illusion: In the video, you are asked to count how many times the people in white shirts pass the ball. The people in the white shirts pass the ball 16 times. However… Did you spot the gorilla? Did you notice the curtain changing color? Did you notice the player on the black team leaving the game? Moral: If you think you are really smart and know what to look for, you might miss other important things. After watching the video again you notice these other things happening that you had watched the first time but could not recall. How does seeing the gorilla but not consciously since you didn’t even notice it have to do with a theory on consciousness? In the world there is so much to perceive that we can’t be conscious of it all. We choose what we are conscious of depending on where we focus our mind (attention). The gatekeeper hypothesis: the only thing you are conscious of is the thing you are focused to (relationship between consciousness and attention). Churchland uses this to raise concerns over Nagel’s point of view.
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'