View
- Term
- Definition
- Both Sides
Study
- All (55)
Shortcut Show
Next
Prev
Flip
PHIL 201 : EXAM 1
What is the difference between a prescriptive and a descriptive claim? |
Prescriptive claim tell how the world should be and descriptive claim tell how the world is, was, or will be. |
What is the difference between essence and accident? |
an essential property of an object is a property that it must have while an accidental property of an object is one that it happens to have but that it could lack
Essence is what it is versus what it happens to be |
What is the difference between an essence and a cause? |
. |
Can you recognize examples of essences versus causes? |
, |
What are necessary and sufficient conditions? |
Necessary = A condition A is said to be necessary for a condition B, if the falsity of A guarantees the falsity of B.
Sufficient = A condition A is said to be sufficient for a condition B, if the truth of A guarantees the truth of B. |
Can you recognize whether being F is necessary, sufficient, or both for being G? |
. |
For example, is being a sister necessary, sufficient, or both for being a sibling? |
Being a sister is sufficient for being a sibling; a sibling could also be a brother |
What is validity? |
If an argument uses a deductive rule correctly (Arguments have premises and a conclusion. The truth of the premises should provide grounds for the truth of the conclusion; premises cannot be true and the conclusion false) structure is good, i.e., follows formal rules |
What is invalidity? |
Does not follow the deductive rule and the truth of the premises does not guarantee the truth of the conclusion (such as P -> Q, Q therefore P) |
Can you recognize whether an argument is valid or invalid? |
. |
What is soundness? |
A valid deductive argument in which all of the premises and conclusion are true |
What is unsoundness? |
If it does not the deductive rule or one or more of the premises are false |
How does epistemology differ from cognitive psychology? |
Epistemology = studies inter alia how we should form beliefs (prescribe)
Cognitive psychology = studies inter alia how we form beliefs (describe) |
Does someone believing something imply that it is true? |
No |
Does someone having good reason to believe something imply that it is true? |
No |
Does someone having good reason to believe something imply that they believe it?
|
No |
Does something being true imply that someone believes it? |
No |
Is it possible to believe something that is true for a bad reason? |
. |
What is justification? |
Justification is a property of belief.
A belief has this property if and only if it is rationally held |
What is a skeptical scenario? |
Asks what do we really know? Our various sources of knowledge are known to be fallible.
Dreams, demons and brain in vat |
How might one try to use skeptical scenarios to support global skepticism? |
This argument doesn’t prove that I don’t know that I have a body.
It proves that either I don’t know that I have a body or one of these premises is false. |
How do Pollock and Cruz react to the main argument for global skepticism? |
Pollock & Cruz suggests that the rational response to the argument is to weigh your confidence that you have a body against your confidence in each of the premises of the argument. |
What is induction? |
In an inductive argument the premises describe some regularity in the world and the conclusion generalizes that regularity.
Presupposition: Things will continue to be as they have been, at least in some relevant respect. |
How does induction differ from deduction? |
. |
What is Hume’s argument against induction? |
(1)The premises of an inductive argument do not logically entail its conclusion. [premise]
(2)If the premises of an argument do not logically entail the conclusion, then it is not reasonable to believe the conclusion on the basis of the premises. [premise]
Therefore,
(3)Inductive reasoning is illegitimate—one cannot acquire knowledge of general truths by reasoning inductively. [conclusion 1-2] |
What is the traditional reaction to Hume’s argument? |
we learn that knowledge doesn't’t require certainty |
How do Pollock and Cruz react to Hume’s argument? |
. |
What is knowledge according to the traditional theory? |
Knowledge is justified, true belief
Necessary conditions: belief, justification, truth |
The Gettier Problem |
counterexamples to JTB account that show justified true belief is not sufficient for knowledge |
How does the Gettier problem challenge the traditional theory? |
. |
Does the Gettier problem purport to show that any of belief, justification, or truth is not necessary for knowledge? If not, what does it purport to show? |
. |
List two claims that are prescriptive, two that are descriptive, and two that are neither prescriptive nor descriptive. |
Descriptive = The cat has fur. The desk is black.
Prescriptive = You should wear your seatbeat. You should be kind to others.
Neither = What time is it? Who are you? |
If a giraffe has its spots essentially, then that giraffe would ___________________ were it to lose its spots. |
cease to exist |
What is it to be a bachelor, i.e., what is the essence of bachelorhood? |
unmarried male |
What is a cause of someone being a bachelor?
|
lack of interest in relationships |
Give a definition of ‘argument’ |
An argument is an inference from one or more premises to a conclusion |
T/F Valid arguments can have false premises |
True |
T/F
The validity or invalidity of a deductive argument depends entirely on its form. |
True |
T/F Sound arguments can be invalid.
|
False |
T/F Invalid arguments can be sound.
|
False |
T/F
Whether an argument is sound depends entirely on whether its premises and conclusions are true.
|
False |
T/F Sound arguments can have false premies. |
False |
According to lecture there is a crucial crucial difference between cognitive psychology and epistemology. Briefly state that difference. |
Cognitive psychology studies how we in fact think; epistemology studies how we should think. |
We discussed three skeptical scenarios: (i) Descartes’s dream scenario, according to which you are dreaming right now; (ii) Descartes’s evil demon scenario, according to which your perceptual experiences are caused by an evil demon; (iii) Putnam’s brain in a vat scenario, according to which you might be a brain in a vat. After describing each skeptical scenario, I asked two rhetorical questions. For one scenario, complete those questions: How will the world........? |
How will the world look to me if I am dreaming right now?
How will the world look to me if I am not dreaming right now? |
Recount the central argument for global skepticism, being sure to make your argument valid and to show that you understood the main bits of the argument. |
. |
Pollock and Cruz emphasize that the global skeptical argument doesn’t prove that I don’t know that I have a body. What do they think it does prove? |
Either (7) [I cannot know that I have a body, that my friends exist, etc.] is true or one of the premises is false. |
Pollock and Cruz also consider Hume’s skeptical argument against induction, according to which inductive arguments are all illegitimate because their premises never ensure their conclusions. They respond that an argument can be legitimate even if __________________________________________________________________, which shows that we can have knowledge without ___________________. |
it’s premises don’t ensure its conclusion
certainty |
According to the traditional theory of knowledge, x knows that P if and only if ______________________ |
x justifiably believes P and P is true |
Gettier cases are inconsistent with the traditional theory of knowledge. Specifically, they are cases where someone meets all of the conditions set out by the traditional theory, but lacks knowledge nonetheless. Give an example of a Getteir case and say what makes it such a case. |
Red believes that it’s 2pm because she look at the clock, which reads 2pm. Since this is a good way to form a belief about the time, her belief is justified. Suppose that the clock is broken, but it happened to be 2pm when Red looked at the clock. Since it happened to be 2pm, Red’s belief is true. But since you can’t gain knowledge through luck, Red’s belief is not knowledge. So, it is a justified true belief that is not knowledge. |
Fill in the following blanks by identifying whether one of the following implies another: knowledge, truth, falsity, justification, and belief. Use the model below as an example. [2]
1.truth does not imply falsity
2.belief does not imply truth |
. |
Fill in the blanks with either ‘S’ for sufficient or ‘N’ for necessary. [1]
Being a sister is ____ but not ___ for being a sibling.
Being an animal is ___ but not ___ for being a dog. |
Being a sister is __S_ but not _N_ for being a sibling.
Being an animal is _N_ but not _S_ for being a dog. |
Valid?
(1) Dwight does not live in Orlando.
(2) If Dwight plays for the Magic, then he lives in Orlando.
__________
Dwight doesn’t play for the Magic |
P -> |
Valid?
(1) If dolphins are not mammals, then I’m a monkey’s uncle.
(2) If sharks are mammals, then the moon is made of cheese.
(3) Either dolphins are not mammals or sharks are mammals.
_________
(4) Either I’m a monkey’s uncle or the moon is made of cheese. |
. |
Valid?
(1) Either the oldest competitor is winning, or Kelly has retired.
(2) If Kelly has retired, then ratings have dropped.
(3) If ratings have dropped, then sponsors have fled.
(4) Sponsors have not fled.
__________
(5) The oldest competitor is winning. |
. |
Valid?
(1) If Jane is an animal, then Jane is a deer.
(2) Jane is not an animal.
Therefore,
(3) Jane is not a deer. |
. |