Study your flashcards anywhere!

Download the official Cram app for free >

  • Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off

How to study your flashcards.

Right/Left arrow keys: Navigate between flashcards.right arrow keyleft arrow key

Up/Down arrow keys: Flip the card between the front and back.down keyup key

H key: Show hint (3rd side).h key

A key: Read text to speech.a key


Play button


Play button




Click to flip

142 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
St. Thomas Aquinas
- doctors of the church "need not be free from error"...they are fallible
- asserts 5 ways to prove there is a God
we can evaluate proofs according to...
- strength
- force
- power to produce conviction in the conclusion
a posteriori; a priori
propositions that are justified in a _______ are often thought to have a justification that is less secure than the proposition justified in a purely ________ fashion
a posteriori justification
highly fallible - see evil demon example
purely a priori proof
an argument in which every single premise is justified a priori
cosmological arguments
partly a posteriori; an inference from certain existence facts about the world to the existence of a certain kind of being (motion --> first mover)
teleological arguments
partly a posteriori; inference from certain goal-based, end-based or purpose-based facts about the world to the existence of a certain kind of being
ontological arguments
purely a priori; no experience or observation of anything in the world is required in order to be justified in believing the premises
"first cause"
argument for the conclusion that a _____ exists isn't an argument for the conclusion that a being is all-good, all-powerful, and all-knowing exists
First Way
from the existence of motion to the existence of a first mover; since there is a motion, there must be a mover
Second Way
nothing can be a cause of its own existence, nor can there be an infinite chain of causes and effects; so there must be a first mover
Third Way
if everything that existed only contingently existed, then there would be a time at which nothing existed; but something exists, and something can't come from nothing; so there can be no time at which nothing existed; so there must be something that necessarily exists
Fourth Way
there is something that is maximally good, noble, and true; there is one thing that is the cause of all goodness, truth, existence, and nobility
Fifth Way
some things act for an end, either by chance or by design; obviously it isn't by chance, so there must be some intelligent being that designed them to act for this end
problem with Aquinas' argument
confusing possible non-existence with a thing not existing at a time
premises that are false in Aquinas' argument
2, 3, and 4
Principle of Sufficient Reason (PSR)
the existence of every contingent being has a causal explanation
Kalam Cosmological Argument
Aquinas' argument that begins: everything that begins to exist has a cause of its existence...the universe began to exist
St. Anselm of Canterbury
Monologion, Proslogion, Cur Deus homo
God is that-than-which-no-greater-can-be-thought
reductio ad absurdum
an argument that begins by assuming the opposite of what one wishes to prove
author of the Design Argument
The Design Argument
the teleological argument that tries to prove the existence of God through a watch and watchmaker appeal
a posteriori
the premises of Paley's design argument are _______ justified
Paley says that we can perceive, upon inspecting a watch, that its parts are put together for a purpose
observations; infer; deduce
_______ of the watch's mechanical structure allow us to _______ or ________ that the watch serves a purpose
True or false: if we cannot fully understand all the parts of the watch, or have never seen one before, then we can't claim the watch has a maker
True or false: the discovery of a reproducing watch makes the inference to the existence of a maker more obvious
Paley compares failure to conclude that a reproducing watch has a maker to the position of a(n) _______
inference to the best explanation (IBE)
the process of arriving at an explanatory process
background knowledge
the evaluation of a best explanation premise of an IBE argument depends on ________
the probability of an observed fact upon a given hypothesis
how likely is it that F would have occurred given that H is true?
the probability that I flip heads ten times in a row (F) given that h1 (I am flipping a fair coin) is low
If we have two hypotheses and there is some fact such that the probability of that fact given the first hypothesis is greater than the probability of that fact given the second hypothesis, then, all other things being equal, the first hypothesis is a _____ explanation of that fact than the second hypothesis
Pr(there is a watch on the heath | there is a watchmaker) =
"works of nature"
there is a disanalogy between the watch case and the _____ case
designer; evolutionary process; our existence
Paley's argument could be repaired by appealing to some kind of ______ of the _______ that gave rise to _______
challenging principle
if there are 10 balls in one urn and ten trillion in the other, there is good evidence that you drew ball 5 from the first urn
doomsday argument
Pr(Your Birth Number is Low | Doom Far) = LOW
Pr(Your Birth Number is Low | Doom Soon) = HIGH
Ethical Intuitionism
some moral propositions are known or justifiedly believed on the basis of intuitions
a particular type of mental state that involves forcefully representing a proposition as being true
example of intuition; ordinary cognitive faculty which we know exists
non-inferential knowledge
some formulate ethical intuitionism as the claim that we have ________ of some moral statements
The Autonomy of Ethics
it is not possible to infer any ethical/moral/evaluative conclusion in a way that would produce (justification for or) knowledge of that conclusion from premises none of which are themselves ethical/moral/evaluative
all inferential knowledge is ultimately based upon (by way of reasonable inferences) non-inferential knowledge
No Moral Skepticism
we have some moral knowledge or some justified moral beliefs
Sam Harris needs to _____ the Authonomy of Ethics if he wants to defend his claim
Hume's Law from "Treatise of Human Nature"
It is impossible to come to know a moral conclusion (like an ought-conclusion) on the basis of a logical derivation from purely non-moral premises (is-premises)
partly moral fact
It is the case that the proposition that "torturing babies just for fun is always wrong is true" - this is a _____
Huemer (Ethical Intuitionism)
uses the "communism is bad" example that does not bridge the is-ought gap
argument contains implicit premises which are evaluative
why the "communism is bad" argument doesn't bridge the is-ought gap
establishes (to my satisfaction) that no deductive argument spans the
is-ought gap unless the conclusion is trivial, like “Bad things are bad”
a ______ argument could provide knowledge of a non-trivial moral conclusion
The First Step Towards Intuitionism
uses The Autonomy of Ethics, Foundationalism, and No Moral Skepticism as premises
(C) Some of our ethical knowledge is non-inferential
conclusion of the First Step towards Intuitionism
Classical Definition of Knowledge
knowledge is justified true belief
No Sensory Moral Knowledge
Purely sensory experiences cannot provide us with the knowledge that anything has a moral property
cognitive faculty; moral claims
perhaps the _____ that lets me know "2 + 2 = 4" is what gives me justification for believing _____
Piety I
Euthypro: I say that the pious is to do what I am doing now, to prosecute the wrongdoer, be it about anything at all, whether the wrongdoer is anyone at all.
Refuting Piety I
Socrates: Bear in mind then that I did not bid you to tell me one or two of the many pious actions, but that form itself makes all pious actions pious.
Piety II
Euthypro: Well, then what is dear to the gods is pious, what is not is impious.
Refuting Piety II
Socrates: The same things then are loved by some of the gods and hated by some of the gods, and those thing would be both god-loved and god-hated.
Piety III
Euthrypro: I think, Socrates, that on this subject no gods would differ from one another, that whoever has killed anyone unjustly should pay the penalty.
is; isn't
there (is/in'st) frequently widespread disagreement amongst humans about whether someone has done something wrong (Socrates); there (is/isn't) disagreement over whether someone who has done something wrong should pay a penalty
Modification I
what is dear to all the gods is pious; what is hated by all gods is impious
Modification II
What is loved by all the gods is definitely just, what is hated by all the gods is
definitely unjust, and what is loved/hated by the gods is neither definitely just nor definitely
Modification III
What is loved by all the gods is just. What is hated by all the gods is unjust.
And everything else is morally neutral.
Divine Command Theory
claims that ethical sentences express propositions, some of which are true, about the attitudes of God; "charity is good" = "God commands charity"
problem with Euthyro's definition of piety
- Assumes that gods never disagree about what is just
- Is an action pious because it is loved by the gods, or do the gods love it because it is pious?
- Non-reflexive causation: is what is loved by all the gods pious because it is loved by all the gods?
Nihilism/Error Theory
there are no objective facts
Moral predicates do not refer to moral propositions in ethical evaluative statements
Three types of Antirealism
- Subjectivism
- Nihilism
- Non-Cognitivism
Two forms of Moral Realism
- Ethical naturalism
- Ethical intuitionism
there are objective moral facts
natural properties
moral properties = _______
Ethical Naturalism
There are objective moral properties, but these properties are identical to natural properties (probably very complex properties)
Ethical Intuitionism
There are objective moral properties, but these properties are not identical with any natural properties; we use intuitive knowledge to know some moral facts
evaluative statement
expresses positive or negative evaluation of something
moral evaluative statements describe the world rather than merely expressing feelings
Argument from Queerness
objective moral properties would be strange propositions, so there are no objective moral properties
Epicurus (341 - 270 BCE)
- If God is willing to prevent evil, but not able, He is impotent
- If God is able to prevent evil but not willing, He is malevolent
- If God is both able and willing, then why does evil exist?
Demean defense
The world is but a point with the universe...the present evil phenomena are rectified in some future period of existence
Leibnizian defense
this is the best of all possible words - the evil that exists is a splotch of ugly color that contributes to the beauty of an overall painting
Great Goods Defense
God must permit the evils he permits in order to realize a great good or to avoid a greater evil
Skeptical Theist's Defense
- There is some reason for which God permits the evil she permits, and we can't know it
- We have no good reason to believe there isn't a good reason for which God permits evil
Plantinga's Argument
to bring about certain greater goods, God has to let some evil exist
natural evil
Plantinga's argument about the necessity of evil does not address the problem of ______
brought up the question of whether torturing babies for some Greater Good is morally acceptable
wrote "The Brothers Karamozov"
i) These apparent evil states of affairs aren't evil
ii) Greater Goods Defense
iii) Skeptical Theist Defense
the theist must claim _____, _____, or _____ to justify the existence of evil
Ivan Karamazov's First Challenge (Dostoevsky)
asks whether you would consent to be the architect of a world the creation of which would entail the incredible suffering of innocent human persons
Le Guin's challenge
aims to elicit the intuition that rebellion is morally required even if the Greater Goods Defense is true
True or false: it does follow from the fact that all arguments for the existence of God are bad that...
- nobody has a good reason for being a theist
- theistic belief must be based on mere faith
Knowledge Regress Argument
what Foundationalism is based on
basic; foundational
beliefs about the external world are often thought to be _____ and _____ beliefs
attempts to philosophically demonstrate that theistic belief is "positively irrational"
The Logical Problem of Evil
These three cannot be true at once:
1) God is wholly good
2) God is omnipotent
3) Evil exists
premises Mackie adds to deduce that God does not exist
4) If something is wholly good, it always eliminates as much evil as it can
5) If something is omnipotent, it can do anything
adequate solution
to reject one of the premises of Mackie's Problem of Evil
fallacious solution
a solution which tries to solve the Problem of Evil while still maintaining the truth of (1) - (5) and implicitly rejecting one of (1) - (5)
First Fallacious Solution
Good cannot exist without evil; evil is a necessary counterpart to good
how Mackie responds to the relative good claim
- The theist holds that God is good in an absolute, not a relative, sense
- The absolute sense of being large doesn't require the existence of anything small
- There could be one thing that is large and no small things
Good Requires Evil II
every quality requires for its existence there being something which lacks that quality
fallacious solution II
the universe is better with some evil in it than it could be if there was no evil
first order evil
an evil necessary for bringing about a higher good (pain)
first order good
second order evil
fallacious solution III
Evil is due to human free will
Mackie's response to fallacious solution III
God should have made men such that they always freely choose the good in order to maintain free will and lack of evil
concerns itself with the truth and falsity of evaluative statements
evaluative statement
expresses a positive or negative evaluation of something; says that something is good, something is bad, something is right, something is wrong, and so on...
concerned with non-evaluative questions about the nature of ethical evaluative statements
Semantic Questions
in the statement "the cat-burning is wrong", does "is wrong" refer to a property the act of cat-burning has?
Epistemological Questions
how can we know, if we even can, that cat-burning is wrong? Is is possible to justify our moral beliefs to others?
Do objective moral values exist? If so, what kinds of things are they?
Moral Psychology
What motivates us to act in the ways we take to be morally required? What motivates us to seek the good? Does sincerely believing an evaluative statement entail in us the presence of a motivation to act in a certain way?
subjective properties
F-ness is ______ IFF whether x is F depends upon the attitude or response of an observer
objective properties
F-ness is _______ IFF F-ness is not subjective
examples of subjective properties
funniness and sexiness
examples of objective properties
squareness and weighing 120 lbs
Moral Realism
claim that there are objective moral properties
Moral Subjectivism and Error Theory
in ethical evaluative statements, moral predicates refer to moral properties
in ethical evaluative statements, moral predicates do not refer to moral properties
Moral Subjectivism
If moral predicates refer to properties, then there are things that have those properties
Emotivist Non-Cognitivism
Evaluative statements are not statements that one feels a certain way, they are MERE expressions of feeling - they don't involve the making of any statements
example of an emotivist non-cognitive statement
crying; "x is good" means "Yay x!"
Prescriptivist Non-Cognitivism
Evaluative statements are commands we use to influence other's behavior - can't be true or false
example of a prescriptivist non-cognitivist statement
"x is good" means "Do x!"; "stealing is wrong" means "Don't steal!"
While evaluative statements purport to refer to moral properties and attribute them to things, there are no such moral properties to be had
Evaluative statements purport to attribute properties to things and some things have those properties
true or false: in subjectivism, some evaluative statements are true
Moral Realism
evaluative statements purport to attribute moral properties to things; there are objective moral properties that do not depend on the attitudes or reactions of people towards them
Ethical Naturalism
There are objective moral properties, but these properties are identical to natural physical properties
Ethical Intuitionism
there are objective moral properties but these properties are not identical with natural properties; have intuitive or basic knowledge of some moral facts
descriptivism; non-cognitivism
Mackie thinks that _____ is true and _____ is false
Motivational Internalism
Necessarily, if S sincerely believes that A is the right course of action, then S will be at least somewhat motivated to do A
Objective Prescriptivity
a moral judgement "tells the person" what to do; something's being good both tells the person who knows it to pursue it and makes him pursue it
The Argument From Queerness (Main Argument)
Objective moral properties would be properties "of a very strange sort, utterly different from anything else in the universe", so there are no objective moral properties
The Realist and Mackie
Claims that there's a connection between natural and descriptive facts and the moral facts
(3) There is no objective moral property such that being acquainted with it requires the presence of ______
The Final Argument
- The Form of the Good is such that something's being good tells the person who knows it to pursue it and makes him pursue it
- An objective good would be sought by anyone acquainted with it
- Reason can never be an "influencing motive of the will"