Philosophy

Front 1

Can a valid argument have a false conclusion?

Back 1

No

Front 2

Can an invalid argument have a true conclusion?

Back 2

yes

Front 3

Can valid arguments have false premises?

Back 3

Valid arguments have to have all sound premises.

Front 4

What is a sound argument? Can an unsound argument have all true premises? Can an unsound argument be valid

Back 4

A sound argument is valid and has all true premises. An unsound argument can be invalid but with all true premises. Unsound arguments can be valid but have one or more false premises.

Front 5

What was the Greek view of democracy and how does it differ from our view of democracy and government?

Back 5

Greek on 10%-15% could vote--city states were tribal at first only white men could vote (not women) and they all voted. THey gathered into a collosium. There were many greek city-states and little was known about how their government worked. Greek system--city states were their own independant governments and constitutions. Governments were local; citizens were much closer. They stayed mostly in the city. Modern citizens. Modern day D. starts with the individual and greek D. starts with the state.

Front 6

What is Dagger and Gere’s preferred solution to the problem of low voter turnout? What other solutions do they reject? Why?

Back 6

Compository Registration (force people to register.
-Composery voting-higher turnout but people wont vote honestly
-automatic registration-still costs money, fails to solve the free-rider problem.

Front 7

Summarize Rousseau’s theory of human nature

Back 7

Everyone is free and wild. There are no rules and everything works out fine until people start owning land. Thats when trouble starts. All men are equal before government.

Front 8

Rousseau proposed the 'social contract' as a way of solving a social and political problem. What was this problem? How did the social contract solve this problem?

Back 8

Rouseau proposed "social contract". People had too much freedom, everyone was causing havo and no one felt secure. This was solved by giving up natural freedom for political freedom. You gain protection from yourself: others by making rules by which you all live by.

Front 9

How does Rousseau avoid the challenge that he is really proposing a totalitarian tyranny?

Back 9

Bu having everyone create the laws at which they must live by. Rather than the state creating rules to live by, everyone decides on laws.

Front 10

What are Prisoner Dilemma situations? Why did Rousseau think that those who have agreed to the social contract would find themselves in a PD situation?

Back 10

If everyone acts in a rational, purely self interest way, everyone will be worse off than they were before. Those who agree with social contract may find theirselves in PD because they may want what is best for then rather than the common good because they want to be on top.

Front 11

What did Rousseau mean when he claimed that some people may have to be “forced to be free”?

Back 11

If a citizen chooses to disobey the social contract then he will be forced to go back to the state of free nature without rules and not be happy or secure.

Front 12

What is Rousseau's solution to the problem of dealing with special interests (factions)?

Back 12

Get rid of factions-only an individual should express his or her won opinions. If factions do occur then there should be lots of them so they cancel themselves out.

Front 13

Consider the following objection to Rousseau: Genuine freedom = obeying only self-imposed laws, but laws which you do not vote for are not self-imposed,so to force the minority to obey laws passed by the majority is to restrict their freedom.
What is Rousseau's response to this objection?

Back 13

Voting is expressing one's beliefs about what will really promote the common good. It's your choice not to vote. It is your own preference and belief.

Front 14

Why does Rousseau claim that in agreeing to the social contract people must give up all of their natural freedom? What do they exchange that freedom for?.

Back 14

Political freedom is what is given when you give up natural freedom. It promotes freedom and equallity to all its citizens.

Front 15

Summarize Condorcet’s theorem about voting.

Back 15

Supporting a decision is not a significant indicator of that decision's reliability. If porportion is significant, then Condorcet's theorem doesn't work. If it is small then the theorem works.

Front 16

One of the problems facing democracies that the Federalist Papers addresses concerns factions (special interests). What was Madison’s solution to this problem? What solutions did he reject and why were they rejected?

Back 16

Works: Control their effects; strengthen motivation to promore the common good and make it difficult for factions to make laws good for them.
Does not work: Remove their causes--restrict freedom of associations.

Front 17

What is Hamilton’s view as to the proper role of the judiciary under the new American Constitution? Does he think it is superior to the other branches of the government?

Back 17

It is supirior to a point because it doesn't deal with the sword and purse.

Front 18

Does Madison favor a large or a small Republic? What are his reasons?

Back 18

Madison favored a repulbic that was not too big or not too small.

Front 19

How did the founders' view of human nature differ from Rousseau's view? Did this contribute to their proposing different models of democracy?

Back 19

Founding fathers were scared of tyranny and democracy and Rousessou was all about it.

Front 20

Jefferson says: "the Earth belongs in usufruct to the living". What does this mean? What fundamental moral and political problem did he think follows from making this assumption?

Back 20

Jefferson feared that we would have to change/update the constitution because people would not have to abide by rules made by dead people.

Front 21

What was Madison's response to Jefferson?

Back 21

Madison argues that legitimate interests of later generations relate to its origional origin.