Waller Philosophy Midterm

Front 1

What philosophy is

Back 1

It is the critical analysis and reasoning of issues
It is a rational enterprise-reasoning things through basic curiousity

Front 2

What philosophy isnt

Back 2

It is not making assertions or stating opinions
It is not a purely secular endeavor
It is not a regurgitation of your mental state.

Front 3

"The unexamined life is not worth living"

Back 3

Socrates

Front 4

First order philosophy

Back 4

metaphysics, epistemology, ect.

Front 5

Second order

Back 5

philosophy of _______

Front 6

Idealists

Back 6

Ideas are most important part of reality, external world dependent upon mind

Front 7

Materialist

Back 7

Everything is matter or dependent upon matter

Aristotle, Karl Marx

Front 8

Rationalist

Back 8

Only can understand the world through reason

Descartes, Baruch Spinoza

Front 9

Empiricists

Back 9

Only understand the world through the 5 senses

John locke, david hume, immanuel kant

Front 10

Three values of philosophy

Back 10

Think critically about views
See big issues and how they interact with our faith
Better articulate/defend views

Front 11

Definition of arguement

Back 11

Attempt to use a series of propositions to lead another to a conclusion

Front 12

Three parts of a good argument

Back 12

1. Premises (propositions that point toward the conc.)
2.Conclusion (what you want the hearer to believe)
3.Inference/Entailment (logical connection between premises and conc.)

Front 13

Inductive

Back 13

Premises point to probability of conclusion; no guarantee the conc will follow


strong or weak

Front 14

Deductive

Back 14

Conclusion must follow from premises; if premises are true the conc must also be true

valid or incalid

Front 15

Modus Ponens

Back 15

If P, then Q (If it’s raining, then it’s wet outside)
P (It’s raining)
Therefore, Q (Therefore, it is wet outside)

Front 16

Modus Tollens

Back 16

If P, then Q (If it’s raining, then it’s wet
Not Q (It’s not wet outside)
Therefore, not P (Therefore, it’s not raining)

Front 17

Valid Deductive Arguement

Back 17

Correct form (Conclusion necessarily follows from premises)

Front 18

Sound Deductive Arguement

Back 18

Valid with true premises

Front 19

Hasty Generalizations

Back 19

Conclusion based on too few number of observations

inductive

Front 20

Valid Deductive Arguement

Back 20

Validity - Correct form (Conclusion necessarily follows from premises)
Soundness - Valid with true premises

Front 21

Syllogism

Back 21

a type of argument where there are two premises and one conclution

Front 22

Lazy Induction

Back 22

Weak conclusion based on evidence

Front 23

Forgetful Induction

Back 23

Neglecting contrary data that would cast reasoning in a different light

Front 24

Formal Fallacy

Back 24

A formal fallacy is one which involves an error in the form, arrangement or technical structure of an argument. The question in view is not whether a conclusion is true or false, but whether the form of the argument is correct or incorrect — valid or invalid.

Front 25

Informal Fallacy

Back 25

Informal fallacies are a matter of unclear expression.

mistakes due to carelessness in relevance of ideas or inconsistencies in our language use

Front 26

Self Refutation

Back 26

Statements that fail to satisfy their own criteria

Front 27

Ad Homenin

Back 27

Attacks the arguer and ignores the substance of one’s argument.

Front 28

Begging the question

Back 28

Assumed conclusion presented without evidence

Front 29

Genetic Fallacy

Back 29

Idea rejected because of its perceived origins

Front 30

Straw man

Back 30

Intentional presentation of weaker form of the argument to easily defeat it

Front 31

Appeal to the people

Back 31

accept conclution to be accepted in group

Front 32

Red Herring

Back 32

divert listeners by changing subject

Front 33

appeal to pity

Back 33

you should help the homeless because they look pitiful

Front 34

metaphysics

Back 34

the study of nature and components of reality
whats real, what is the universe made of, what is the nature of the universe

Front 35

Pre-Socratics -

Back 35

Earliest philosophers concerned with metaphysics in nature

Front 36

Sophists -

Back 36

No such thing as reality, and even if there was, we couldn’t know anything about it.

Front 37

Problem of one and many

Back 37

universe is one thing. Because it is one thing, there must be one, unifying aspect behind everything. The problem is figuring out what that one, unifying idea is.

Front 38

Plato-World of Being

Back 38

Transcendent world which contain Forms

Front 39

Plato-World of Becoming

Back 39

Space-time world which contain objects Objects

Front 40

What are forms?

Back 40

-the causes of particular things
-exist objectively and absolutely
-designante what a thing is

Front 41

How do forms relate to things?

Back 41

A copy or imitation
A participation in the form

Front 42

Plato reacted against

Back 42

Sophist teaching of Protagorus, and Heroclitus who said that everything is subject to change

Front 43

What is a universal

Back 43

an attribute that can be universally emplified in many different things at the same time

Front 44

Realist believe about universals

Back 44

universals really exist; they can be had by more than one thing; they do not exist in space and time

Front 45

Non-realist believe about universals

Back 45

Do not believe in universals, but rather that:
1. Objects have “properties”, but they are just physical particulars
2. Describing words can be true of objects
world cannot allow anything of the immaterial nature to exist

Front 46

Decartes

Back 46

Ultra-rationalist
systematic doubt
Realization of imperfection means there is perfection to base that off of, this must be God, and the nature of God makes belief in the external world certain

Front 47

cognito

Back 47

the principle establishing the existence of a being from the fact of its thinking or awareness.

I think therefore I am

Front 48

#1 Behaviorism-to explain how mind and body interact

Back 48

Behaviorism - Mental terms = overt bodily behavior (Pain = Reaction)
But, behavior is not always necessary or sufficient

Front 49

#2 Type/Type identity

Back 49

Mental state=brain state
Mental states are numerically associated with brain states
But, we experience Phenomenology (texture of phenomena); and multilple realization where one mental state can be exemplified by many brain states

Front 50

#3 Eliminative Materialism -

Back 50

Eliminates use of mental terms, only accepts brain states
But, it is contradictory in nature (belief of no beliefs)

Front 51

#4 Functionalism -

Back 51

Mental state merely brain state that serves the functional role between input and output

Front 52

Primary Quality -

Back 52

a quality thought to characterize matter

Front 53

Secondary Quality -

Back 53

a quality you are aware of through sensory organs

Front 54

Leibniz’ Law

Back 54

of the Indiscernibility of Identicals - For any entity ‘x’ and any entity ‘y’, if ‘x’ is identical to ‘y’, then for all properties ‘P’, ‘P’ is true of ‘x’ only if ‘P’ is true of ‘y’
if i can put one quality of mind that is distinctly different than body then according to Leibniz law they are 2 separate entities

Front 55

Compatibilism

Back 55

is the belief that free will and determinism are compatible ideas, and that it is possible to believe both without being logically inconsistent.

Front 56

Epistemology

Back 56

philosophy concerned with the nature of knowledge.

Front 57

Chrisholm’s versions

Back 57

states the problem as one of avoiding circularity in answering the following two questions: What do we know? & How are we to decide what we know?

Front 58

Stuep’s version

Back 58

states the problem as one of harmonizing the following propositions: I can identify instances of knowledge only if I already know the criteria of knowledge. & I can know the criteria of knowledge only if I can already identify the instances of knowledge.

Front 59

Three proposed solutions to problem of criterion-methodism

Back 59

stat with criteria for knowledge

Front 60

Three proposed solutions to problem of criterion-particularism

Back 60

start with instances of knowlege

Front 61

Particularism

Back 61

start with instances of knowledge

Front 62

truth

Back 62

Reject that one can make objective observations of the world.
Reject the idea of an autonomous knower
Say that truth is community-related
Reject the idea that truth is objective
Say that truth is not certain or rational

Front 63

JTB theory

Back 63

Belief- generated by some source
Truth- belief describes a real state of affairs in the world
Justification- must have good reasons to believe the true belief.

Front 64

Belief condition

Back 64

Belief condition: in order to have knowledge of something, one has to have a belief about something. Although belief is a necessary condition of knowledge, it is not a sufficient one.

Front 65

Truth condition

Back 65

knowledge not only requires belief, but it also requires true belief. We’ve already seen that this is a metaphysical condition because truth is tied to reality.

Front 66

Jusstification condition

Back 66

: for a true belief to be counted as knowledge the belief must be supported by good reasons to believe it.

Front 67

Foundationalism

Back 67

- the belief that all knowledge rests ultimately on fundamental truths that are themselves not subject to any proof and are the foundations of all other truths.

Front 68

Coherentism-

Back 68

not all knowledge and justified belief rest ultimately on a foundation of noninferential knowledge or justified belief.