Philosophy Midterm 2

Front 1

Occam's razor

Back 1

Do not mulitply entities beyond necessity. The simplest one should be chosen

Front 2

Humanism

Back 2

View that humans and their live abouve that of any supernatural beings or divinities, rejects religion. No need to justify good deeds because of a god

Front 3

Material Cause

Back 3

The material something is composed of. The material cause of a wooden chair is wood

Front 4

Formal cause:

Back 4

the essence or form something is patterned after. A generic image of which particualrs partake. The formal cause of a dog would be those properties that are necessary for the dog to be a dog.

Front 5

efficient cause

Back 5

the primary source of change. Cause of a sculpture is the sculpter

Front 6

Theism

Back 6

the veiw that god exists and can prove/know it

Front 7

atheism

Back 7

view that god does not exist and can prove/know it

Front 8

Agnostic

Back 8

view that God may or may not exist and we cannot know either way

Front 9

Metaphysics

Back 9

branch of phil: study of being, what there is.

Front 10

Epistemology

Back 10

study of human knowledge

Front 11

Logic

Back 11

study of reasoning

Front 12

Ethics

Back 12

study of right and wrong

Front 13

Aesthetics

Back 13

study of beauty

Front 14

Necessary Conditions

Back 14

Conditions required for somethign to be the case:
Water is necessary for life
if there is life, then there is water
the possibility of human life requries water

Front 15

Sufficient Conditinos

Back 15

Conditions that guarantee something is the case: (If P then Q)
Human life is a sufficient conditions for water
If there is human life, there is water
Human life entails that water exists

Front 16

rationalism

Back 16

All knowledge requires certainty, All knowledge depends on reason.

Front 17

Epistemological Turn

Back 17

view that epistemology is mroe fundamental than any other field of inquiry. All other fields are not justified in their claims to knowledge with out epistemology

Front 18

Analytic Statement

Back 18

The predicate adds nothing new to our concept of the subject (a bachelor is an unmarried man)

Front 19

Synthetic statement:

Back 19

adds to our concept of the subject even though it is not necessarily contained in the subject. (This triangle has 3 equal sides)

Front 20

Skepticism

Back 20

Knowledge is not possible, we should withhold assent from believing either way, there is no rational justification for anyclaim of knowledge or belief that we make.

Front 21

3 Kinds of Knowledge:

Back 21

Intuitive knowledge/Acquatance: Eric knows Jimi
Practical Knowledge: Jimi knows how to drive
Descriptive/ Propositional Knowledge: Jimi knows that he is driving

Front 22

First Cause Argument:

Back 22

Everything we see in this world has a cause,
If we go further back we start an infinite regress of causes
There fore there must be a first cause
This first cause we call God

Front 23

Argument from desing (as analogy):

Back 23

1. A watch (or any other artifice) requires the existence, at least at some time, of a designer.
2. Just because a designer cannot be found for an artifice does not mean there is not one.
3. Just because the artifice has faults does not indicate there was no designer.
4. Just because the design was not optimal does not indicate there was no designer.
5. Order and general laws necessitate an intelligence to impose the order and laws.
Paley backsteps here – a “power” could suffice for laws to come about.
6. Teleology (having an end, or final cause) indicates the existence of a designer.
7. Even if the watch were capable of self-replication, an initial designer is still necessary. (shift to a formal cause)
8. It is not possible to appeal to an infinite chain of self-replicating watches. An infinite regress of direct efficient causes is unsatisfactory.
9. The efficient cause of the first watch is, in fact, the cause of all subsequent watches

Front 24

Argument from Design (direct):

Back 24

1. Complexity requires intelligence to arise – complexity cannot arise by chance.
2. There is a great deal of complexity in the universe.
3. Therefore, the universe must have been designed by an intelligence.
4. This intelligence is God.

Front 25

What does Argument from Design prove?

Back 25

An initial creator, an unmoved mover; no robust theism or O3 God. The God established by this argument could be the Greek god Chronos, who set the establishment of the universe in motion and has since not played a role in it.

Front 26

Objections to Argument from Design

Back 26

1. Complex artifacts can and do arise by natural processes (snowflakes, crystal formations) and from very small randomly-generated yet naturally selected steps.
2. Incomplete analogy – We differentiate artifacts from natural formations because we have experience of both; For us to do the same for a designed universe we need experience of an undesigned universe, which we don’t have.
3. If complexity requires a designer more complex then the design, what designed the designer? This results in an infinite regress at least as bad as the self-replicating watches.
4. Theory of evolution and natural selection as empirical counterpoint to the necessity of a designer.

Front 27

What can be called into doubt

Back 27

) Establish secure foundations upon which to build (lasting and firm) body of knowledge

2) Overthrow all beliefs – so that there are none which are not grounded on or are not themselves propositions of absolute certainty

3) Since the senses have deceived me before, I should not now trust them
- I should not only doubt obviously false things, but I should withhold assent from even my former beliefs – for I want something certain

4) Even though things seems to me to be the case, it doesn’t therefore follow that it is the case
- a) it seems to me that P
- b) Therefore, P
- this in an invalid argument form – to see why:

5) It seems to me the Sun is larger than Polaris, therefore the Sun is larger than Polaris.
Descartes’ counterexamples: 1) The Dream Argument (weaker)
2) The Evil Demon Argument (stronger)

6) Everything I formerly believed is now in doubt and I will only accept those ideas that are indubitable as a basis for knowledge