Final Exam Guide (Philosophy 101)
Final Exam Guide (Philosophy 101) Philosophy 101
Popular in Introduction to Philosophy
verified elite notetaker
verified elite notetaker
verified elite notetaker
verified elite notetaker
verified elite notetaker
verified elite notetaker
Popular in PHIL-Philosophy
verified elite notetaker
This 13 page Study Guide was uploaded by Hannah James on Sunday September 6, 2015. The Study Guide belongs to Philosophy 101 at University of Wisconsin - Madison taught by Henry Southgate in Spring 2014. Since its upload, it has received 278 views. For similar materials see Introduction to Philosophy in PHIL-Philosophy at University of Wisconsin - Madison.
Reviews for Final Exam Guide (Philosophy 101)
Yes YES!! Thank you for these. I'm such a bad notetaker :/ will definitely be looking forward to these
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: 09/06/15
Summaries Week 1 Is there a God Descartes 0 Everything including eternal truths depends on God for its existence 0 God is the author of everything 0 1 1 2 only because God will it 0 God created everything and creation is good because god willed to make it so not because good existed independent of God 0 So eternal truths are immutable but are not necessary 0 Believes in God s divine omnipotence absolute no limits to his power 0 Believes in God s divine simplicity his will and knowledge are the same thing wills good while knowing it to be good Leibniz 0 Saying that God creates good ruins our image of God s love and glory 0 What reason is there to praise God if goodness is arbitrary can we even say God is good 0 God can only be good if he understands and wills what is in itself good and true 0 So for Leibniz unlike Descartes God s will and understanding are like our own 0 Leibniz limits God s will it s limited by his wisdom 0 God s will does not make things good he wills them because he understands them to already be good 0 Problem of Evil why did God allow suffering in the perfect world 0 Leibniz says that evil exists but we cannot understand why it is best 0 Also this world is perfect because it is the simplest in hypotheses and richest in phenomena harmonious and diverse it has the most reality 0 God does not interfere with the laws he s put into place because then they wouldn t be perfect 39 God gives us free will and cannot intervene when we make decisions that cause suffering Week Two Is there a God Saint Anselm The Ontological Argument 0 Proves God s existence follows from the concept of God God is conceivable so God is actual a priori proof prior to existence 0 If we understand the meaning of the term God we know that God exists God s essence what he is entails his existence that he is 0 Argument 1 God can be conceived so he exists in the mind 0 A things is greater if it exists in the mind and in reality I If God is the greatest conceivable being he must exist in both or he is not the greatest thing that can be conceived 0 Argument 2 It is impossible to conceive that God does not exist 0 Something that needs to exist God is greater than something that can be conceived not to exist I If the GCB can not exist it is not the GCB 0 God is the GCB so he must exist Gaunilo On behalf of the fool I You cannot infer existence through conception existence is proven through observation 0 You can replace the GCB with the greatest of anything ex island 0 The line of reasoning then proves that the greatest island exists Anselm Reply to Gaunilo 0 An island is contingent and limited so there is no such thing as the GCI it cannot replace the GCB I the argument 0 The DA only works for something necessary no beginningend 0 Things that could make an island greater will make it resemble an island less and less St Thomas Aquinas The Existence of God Chapter 2 0 People cannot understand the essence of God so it is not selfevident that he exists 0 So God the proposition that God exists has to be known from observable effects 0 Five ways for God s existence 1 The argument from change 0 Everything changes as a result of something else I So there must be a first cause that started this chain that is God 0 2 Argument from the nature of sufficient cause 0 The existence of each thing is caused by something else 0 If you remove the first cause all members of the series following it would not exist 0 An infinite series has not first cause so it would have no final effects I But we are here and exist so the series of efficient causes is not infinite 0 There must be a first cause this is God I 3 Argument from possibility and necessity 0 Every contingent being relies on a necessary being for its existence I Natural things are contingent because the experience generation coming to be and corruption ceasing to be I If everything is contingent then at one time there was nothing in existence 0 Nothing can come from nothing so it would ve been impossible for anything to have begun to exist without a necessary being this is God 0 4 Argument from gradations 0 All beings are ranked in a hierarchy I No natural member can be the highest possible member of an order so there must be a supernatural entity to be ranked highest in goodness truth etc that is God 0 5 Argument from the order of the world 0 The world is a harmonious whole I The world exhibits order that cannot be explained by natural science or human behavior 0 There must be intelligence in the source of the world God Weellt Thee Is there a God Blaise Pascal The Wager 0 In wagering the worst outcome in wagering for God equals the best outcome for wagering against him so you should wager that God exists 0 Problems I The argument misrepresents the stakes and the possibilities God might not reward such cynical faith 0 If you wager for God you can live your life plus an eternal one 0 Problem there is no reason to assume the probability of God existing is 5050 many Gods etc 0 Rationally you should wager for the side with the best return in case of success so rationally you should wager for God 0 Logical Objections to wager 0 There are many Gods 0 There are different amounts of faith pure faith believers vs cynical believers 0 Moral Objections to wager 0 You give up luxury desire etc if you have faith so the nonbeliever has not given up nothing for their fait the wager is off Bertrand Russell Why I am not a Christian 0 Firstcause argument 0 If everything needs a cause why not substitute the world for God as that cause world could be eternal so it does not favor god s existence 0 Natural law argument 0 Laws imply a lawgiver God 0 But laws are statistical averages of nature such as would emerge from chance I Human laws show what should happen so they have a lawgiver but natural laws describe what happens so they don t need one 0 The argument from design 0 Darwinism refutes the design argument inhabitants evolve to become suitable to environment the environment is not created to be suitable to them 0 The problem of evil if God is so good why is there evil 0 Moral arguments for God no rightwrong without God 0 If God creates good he himself is not good 0 But if right and wrong are independent of God he is not needed Argument for remedying injustice there would be no justice without God 0 The world is unjust and there is no evidence for otherwise Week Four What is the meaning of life Plato Apology Socrates all that matter is virtue O Socrates is wise because he knows he has no wisdom A good man can t be harmed bc virtue is the sole good thing and vice is everything else Socrates claims the greatest good is to discuss virtue daily which he did by questioning people why he s in trouble Epicurus Moderate hedonism The goal of life is to have the most pleasure and least pain 0 We should regulate our desires to be free from the pain of want 0 If we come to understand that death is nothing we ll be free from the pain of anxiety over it There are kinetic pleasures satisfying a desire and static pleasures pleasure that arises when all desires are satisfied Prudence is the most valuable of all virtues it enables us to choose our desires some pleasures cause more pain and are not worth choosing Live a simple life one full only of natural and necessary desires A good life can be had in a finite amount of time an infinite life would not add to the goodness of life Week Five What is the meaning of life Diogenes Laertius Stoic ethics The world is governed by God and everything strives to fulfill its function in God s divine plan 0 We are to live according to reason in order to become as complete as possible The primary virtues are prudence knowledge of good and bad courage knowledge of what one is to endure justice knowledge of what is to be distributed and temperance organization and orderliness 0 These virtues follow one another to have one is to have them all There are preferred and dispreferred indifferent skill life health beauty and wealth vs poverty bad reputation disease weakness etc The opposite of virtue is vice imprudence cowardice injustice and intemperance Only virtue is good and is sufficient for happiness Epictetus Enchiridion selections on stoicism 0 There is a division between internal and external what we can control and what we cannot 0 Avoid that which limits our ability to choose and desire nothing 0 Act with judgment and selfdiscipline 0 We are by nature free but we are carried away be appearances and external things when we suppose them to be in our control they are not 0 We inhibit our own freedom this way and so we must free ourselves by letting go of external things 0 We should conduct ourselves toward others without envy malice judgment or pretention and we should conduct ourselves toward faith with resignation and acceptance 0 We should also be accepting towards death so it goes Kierkegaard The Sickness unto Death 0 Without true Christian faith you will exemplify one of the forms of despair O Despair failure to become oneself in a spiritual synthesis of temporal and eternal finite and infinite 0 DRAW DIAGRAM Week Six What is the meaning of life Nietzsche The Gay Science 0 We as a species need the opportunity to create and master in order to stir up the passions and to have a sense of vitality 0 Guilt and moral institutions are fabricated and are artificial human constructs 0 Men must be bold love life and seek challenge 0 The essence of life as will to power is to push itself to and beyond its limits 0 Live a dangerous life that burns itself out because it is the only one you get do not seek dormancy rest or peace Week Seven What is the meaning of life Sartre Existentialism and Human Emotions 0 Objections to Existentialism O Quietism leads to inaction O Pessimism connected w subjectivism focuses on man as an isolated being 0 Capricepermits people to do anything and cannot condemn any actions 0 Existentialism O Maintains that existence precedes essence the fact that something exists occurs before it is defined opposite example is a diagram and a chair 0 Says a man is nothing but what he makes of himself subjectivity what a man does defines him 39 So we are responsible for ourselves and our fellow men I When you choose to do something you choose for your fellow man as well I When you choose to do something you affirm its value to you 0 Our responsibility to ourselves and others creates three notions O Anguish feeling of responsibility you have when you realize that you choose who you are and all of mankind as well I Because we create values and thus are responsible for what we believe I This replies to the objection of quietism anguish is a condition of action because the anguish is present through responsibility for one s actions 0 Forlornness we are condemned to be free and choose our being because we have to face the consequences of God not existing I All guidance for values etc disappears without God 0 However this proof is weak because Sartre says good and bad are inherent in their value even without God we can still determine His values to be good I Our values are too broad to assist us with concrete decisions and there are no feelings people or omens to help you decide either you are condemned in your freedom I So there is always a leap when deciding something but if values told us exactly what to do there d be no leap or any choice in the matter at all 0 Despair confine ourselves to grapple only with what depends on our will I Replies to objection of pessimism because it is actually optimistic a man s destiny is decided by himself alone 0 This appraises man by their actions only a man is nothing but a series of undertakings 0 People don t like this because they cannot escape judgment for their own inadequacies O Sartre claims this freedom allows us to be something else provided we are totally committed a drunk doesn t have to drink anymore I He didn t say it would be easy though 0 Against the charge of subjectivism 0 Man cannot be anything without other men I We physically exist independently but we cannot have normative existence we cannot be a good singer unless we are recognized as such 0 Against the charge of caprice O The values of action appear after the action is done but that doesn t make them capricious or without meaning I We create and invent values but we forge laws by creating them they are not meaningless 0 An existentialist cannot pass judgment 0 Freedom is implicit s you cannot want something that would restrict the freedom of others so you cannot just do whatever you want I Freedom relies on its recognition by others 0 Freedom is the basis of universal ethics we should promote our freedom and the freedom of others Week Eight What is the meaning of life Camus The Myth of Sisyphus 0 Suicide is the only philosophical problem because it decides if life is worth living 0 It shows that life is too much or not worth the trouble 39 Shows they have recognized the absurdity of life 0 Absurdity 0 Causes you to ask why about the day to day life 0 Makes you recognize the aging process 0 The world s density is apparent and we realize how small we are 0 The human behavior fills you with nausea 0 Suicide is embracing the absurd 0 Living is to be in revolt recognize its absurdity and futility but live anyway Colin Wilson AntiSartre 0 Sartre misunderstands the nature of perception 0 In perception we filter out irrelevant things and bring order to chaos 39 So Sartre is wrong we don t ignore the complexity of the world we filter it for survival because we know how complex it is 0 Sartre s drug use removes the filters that protect people from being overwhelmed 0 But he mistakes this as the nature of reality 0 Camus s absurdity is wrong because things only see absurd if you rob them of a dimension of reality 0 Ex turn down volume on a TV it seems absurd does not prove the inhumanity of the guy on the phone from Camus s example 0 Ex Conductor has a truer perception of sound than an unmusical stranger he can detectfilter the various instruments notes etc I We are the conductor existentialist is the stranger 0 Ex Schoolboy experiences nausea from his bewilderment at not understanding algebra they have meaning they are only meaningless to him I But this meaninglessness is not objective Week Eight What should I do and why should I do it Kant Groundwork of the metaphysics of morals Chapter 1 The Good Will only good will is inherently good others are conditional ex talent wealth etc 0 It is good in itself not because of its effects 0 Even if events prevent someone from realizing their will it s still good 0 Willing involves effort wishing is merely hoping that something occurs I A human action is only morally good if it is done for the sake of duty 0 If you act only in conformity of duty the action is good but it is motivated by something like selfinterest inclination etc 0 Acting from duty means duty is the sole motivation Chapter 2 Imperatives in general will is practical reason I Objective principles everyone has them reason entirely controls passion I Subjective principles basis of an individual s actions I Humans don t act entirely of reason objective principles impose necessity upon their will to do something even if subjectively they don t want to necessitation O Gives us imperatives things we ought to do I Hold for all rational agents command what is good I Hypothetical imperatives means to an end to get X do Y I Categorical imperatives objectively necessary regardless of an end ex do not lie 0 3 kinds of imperatives O Imperative of skill H technical imperatives means to end if you want A s do your HW I Kind of necessity rules I Whoever wills an end will its means also analytic proposition because willing involves a plan of action 0 Imperative of prudence H pragmatic imperatives end that every rational agent wants ex want happiness seek fulfilling ways to spend time I Kind of necessity counsel I Whoever wills an end wills its mean but happiness is vague so the means are unclear O Imperative of morality C moral imperatives essentially good not based on action I Kind of necessity command law I Justified by view of nature as a rational agent not as an end Five ways of representing the categorical imperative I The formula of universal law act only on a maxim that you can will to be a universal law 0 We cannot hold people to rules we would exempt ourselves from this would be a contradiction O Duties I Otherregarding duties to other people selfregardingto ourselves I Perfectduty w no exception imperfectlenient only some must be done I Perfect contradiction in conceptionimperfect contradiction in willing I The formula of the law of nature act as if the maxim would become thru your will a law I The formula of the end in itself act only to treat humanity as an end not a means I The formula of autonomy act as if your will through its maxims makes universal law 0 A man is an end he he is selflegislating subject toauthor of universal law I The formula of the kingdom of ends use maxims that are law for the kingdom of ends O Kant claims that 12 and 5 are identical which makes his argument consistent and proves that there s on categorical imperative controversial because we can get different outcomes from the formulas Week Nine What should I do and whv should I do it John Stuart Mill Utilitarianism 0 Mill believes in higher and lower pleasures quality 0 Higher pleasures outweigh any quantity of lower pleasures do not produce more happiness but a better kind of happiness 0 Higher pleasures still allow someone to be happy but mayby not as content 0 Objection 1 standard of utilitarianism is too high you should always act to promote maximal good 0 Reply what you are motivated to do and what you do are different the doctrine only tells you what you ought to do 0 O 2 renders people cold towards individual character 0 Reply the doctrine doesn t force you to do this it only explains what you ought to do 0 O 3 utilitarianism is a godless doctrine 0 O 4 promotes expediency over principle promotes good of an agent and his friends over moral rule 0 Reply violation of moral rule tends to be a detriment to the good so the rule is even more expedient in this doctrine 0 O 5 there is insufficient time for hedonic calculus 0 O 6 the utilitarian may tweak the calculus to do what he wants 0 Why are people bound to promote happiness 0 External sanctions hope or favor from others or from God 0 Internal conscience feeling of duty ultimate sanction of this moral doctrine and of all others too 0 Is moral obligation subjective 0 Objective origin outside the human mind transcendental theory 0 Subjective origin in the human mind itself 0 Is conscience innate or acquired 0 Innate if it is utilitarianism seems to go along best with this belief 0 Acquired Mill s opinion conscience isn t born but it is natural to us I Mankind desires to be in unity with its fellow creatures goal is to achieve a society of equals I This is a secular religion internal sanctions make people feel their own interests are bonded with others external sanctions show society praises maximal utility and promotion of good 0 All things promote the desire of happiness even virtue it is desired as a part if happiness being virtuous will make you happier 0 So happiness is the sole end and its promotion is the sole test by which human conduct should be judged Week Eleven What should I do and why should I do it Harris The Survival Lottery 0 Two patients are dying and the doctors can save them he should kill and innocent person to save the two lives one for two 0 Everyone gets a lottery number to determine whether or not they must be sacrificed 0 Objections 0 Desire for security would always wonder if you would be selected but lives would be more secure with the system because more people would live long lives 0 Individuality a person is unique and we should reject a society that sees them as interchangeable but why is one person s individuality more important than the other two 0 Playing God deaths of patients would be natural but death of innocent is man made but electing not to save those patients is also playing God 0 Moral difference between killing and letting die but this begs the question and doesn t prove that they are different 0 System would cause terror distress etc a period of education could remove these feelings O Involvement of third parties Why not give the patient s heart and lungs to each other because this would be unfair and would put the unfortunate into a lower class Hannick On the survival lottery 0 A person has bodily integrity and should decide what happens to their body 0 The utilitarian cannot object to the lottery but the absolutionist can I Because it requires killing an innocent 0 You do not let the patients die you simply refrain from saving them 0 The patients cannot have the innocent killed without intentionally seeking his death this is the difference between the actions 0 The absolutionist doesn t need to prove that the patients intentionally kill the innocent only that they intentionally assault them doctor doesn t do this to the patients 0 Intentional assault is the difference between the death of the patientsthe donor 0 Harris claim of selfdefense won t work bc all chances of survival increase w lottery 0 But donor s don t we cannot ignore this 0 Harris says that if the donor has a right to selfdefense then so do the patients 0 But does this justify killing someone to save yourself 0 Being healthy is not a crime so why should the donor be punished for it 0 Because the donor does not violate the rights of the patients by living they cannot claim selfdefense in killing him Weellt Twelve What is art Plato The quarrel between philosophy and poetry 0 Art only recreates the appearance of things not an actual object 0 Art of representation is a long way from reality I Formsrealitythingscopies of formsappearancesart I Criticism of art as cognitively bankrupt 0 Three arts concerned with an object art of making it art of using it and art of representing it I Maker is instructed by the user on how to better produce it so the user knows the most about the object 0 Artist has no knowledge of whether or not his representations are sound he only represents it the way that pleases the taste of the multitude so his knowledge shouldn t be trusted O Knowledgephilosophy correct opinioncraftsmen ignoranceart I Criticism of art as morally corrupting 0 Art appeals to emotions which are subject to illusions and which reasonable men conceal in front of others 0 Art sets a bad example it presents what we generally consider ridiculous behavior in a noble light Week Thirteen What is art Aristotle Poetics I Plato s criticism of art as irrational 0 Art is not theoretical but that does not mean it is irrational I It is just differently rational and belongs to practical reason rather than theoretical reason 0 Art is a kind of making like crafts and so artists present no threat to society 0 When we judge art we do so with respect to the work not with respect to how it s brought about 0 Art is something mimetic imitative 0 Plato s criticism of art as imitative 0 Art is mimetic but this conception of mimesis is different from Plato s I Mimesis is not bad I Art imitates nature s activity human actionslife I It imitates the principles in human actionslife while Plato thinks that art only imitates nature s products 0 EX tragedy Plato thinks this art just copies what is already there I But for Aristotle the artist doesn t copy what s already there he imitates what is possible or what ought to be history vs poetry I Artists can go beyond the bounds of what is possible in his imitation 0 Art is educative for Aristotle in a way that it is not for Plato teaches what simple observations and facts cannot I Art is philosophical and teaches us things I It is through imitation that we first come to learn I Plato s criticism of art as morally corrupting O Catharsis releasing of strong emotions and being cleansed and relieved of them can have useful effects and can be done by viewing art 0 Imitating events that make us feel pity or fear can be useful to us 0 Our reactions to wellcrafted plots and characters reveal that we enjoy art and it can be beneficial to us Kant Critique of the power of judgement 0 Art can be beautiful agreeable or good 0 Pleasure in beauty is disinterested 0 Beauty vs pleasure you desire pleasurable things and are pleased by getting what you desire 0 Beauty vs good you approve of something as good and aim to bring it about 0 Two kinds of aesthetic judgements 0 Taste of sense I Wants the pleasure of the agreeable objects 0 Taste of re ection I True judgement of taste I Wants the pleasure of the beautiful 0 Central elements of beauty 0 A disinterested liking liking is subjectively universal 0 Form of purposiveness without purpose has a method and steps but no exact purpose to its existence 0 Free harmony of facultiesfree lawfulness of the imagination I Judgements of beauty are not based on concepts like the concept of perfection I Harmony of the faculties and form 0 Viewer imaginationunderstanding object 0 Imagination faculty for arranging sensuous informationfaculty through which we represent an object that is not present in intuition 0 Understanding tells us how to interpret the combination of the sensuous informationfaculty of concepts the sole use of concepts is in judgement I Rules are followed by the understanding in order to unify what is going on 0 Imagination follows these rules 0 Beauty objects appears unified according to a form but there s no rule for that form only as if there were a rule or form I You cannot write up a recipe for a beautiful object Beauty heightens your cognitive awareness of the world might be the highest functioning of the mind Only humans can have the combination of sensibility and understanding necessary to judge beauty thus the experience of beauty is a distinctly human phenomenon Beautiful art 0 Art is not nature science or handicraft 0 Only nature is absolutely beautiful but art that closely resembles nature is relatively beautiful Genius naturalinborn cannot be copied O Geniuses are inspired and filled With spirit 0 Works are original and exemplary they give a rule for others to follow The faculties of the mind required for beautiful art 0 Imagination understanding spirit the animating principle of the mindthe faculty for presenting aesthetic ideas and taste Aesthetic ideas an idea beyond the bounds of experience produced by the imagination 0 Aims at exhibiting a concept but is much richer than any particular concept I Stirs up feelings and associations in us in a way that a concept does not enlivens a conceptmakes it real 0 Ex Shakespeare shall I compare thee to a summer s day
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'