Philosophy Test

Front 1

According to Ayer, meaningful statements.

Back 1

Analytic, tautological, or a priori statements. (logically true or false by virtue of the way words or symbols are used)
AND
Empirical or synthetic statements. (require sense impressions in order to determine their truth or falsity)

Front 2

According to Ayer, meaningless statements.

Back 2

Metaphysical statements. (they fail the test of verifiability, unlike analytical or empirical statements)
AND
Emotive statements, ethic/moral and aesthetic. (only meaningful in terms of what they express of internal feelings)

Front 3

Ayer's Paragraph

Back 3

The criterion which we use to test the genuineness of apparent statements of fact is the criterion of verifiability. We say that a sentence is actually significant to any given person, if, and only if, he knows how to verify the propositions which it purports to express - that is, if he knows what observations would lead him, under what conditions, to accept the proposition as being true, or reject it as being false... For a statement of fact to be a genuine proposition some possible observations of fact must be relevant to the determination of its truth or falsehood.

Front 4

The Critic's Answer to A.J. Ayer

Back 4

In essence Ayer said: "All meaningful statements or propositions are either analytic (true by definition) or empirical (true by reference to the world). Both analytic and empirical statements can be shown to be true or false. All other statements (claims) are metaphysical, can not be shown to be true or false, and are therefore without meaning."

This claim by Ayer is itself neither analytic nor empirical and is therefore without meaning.

Front 5

Groupthink

Back 5

I IS SOUR

Isolation leads to distortion of reality

Illusion of group's invulnerability
Superiority feel morally

Self-appointed mind-guards, enforce
Outsiders stereotyped (distortion)
Us vs. them mentality
Reality - out of touch with

Front 6

Paradigm

Back 6

A form based on a single pattern of thought. A lens through which you see the world. A world view. A pattern of thought deeply and unconsciously ingrained.

Front 7

Statement of the Problem of Evil

Back 7

How is the apparent existence of evil compatible with a loving (providential), omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent Creator? If God is all-powerful and good why doesn't He destroy all evil?

Front 8

Solutions to Problem of Evil

Back 8

FERNS PLIGHT

Freedom/Free will of humans cause
Evil doesn't exist, all for best
Removed Himself after He made..
Natural law not operate capriciously
Strengthened through suffering

Pseudo-problem language holiday
Limited power - intervene if could
Incomplete goodness, God perfect
Good defined by evil, need contrast
Home of God, death better place
Test the faithful

Front 9

Conclusion to Abraham/Isaac/God

Back 9

God must not have had prior knowledge of Abraham's pending decision. The reason: foreknowledge is generally understood (by most philosophers) to mean preordained.

Front 10

Fallacy

Back 10

Mistake in reasoning or inference

Front 11

Fallacy of Equivocation

Back 11

A crucial word within an argument is used with two different meanings.

Front 12

Amphiboly

Back 12

An entire sentence in an argument is ambiguous rather than a single word.

Front 13

Fallacy of Significance

Back 13

There's no point of reference, must compare to something different or bigger to have significance.

Front 14

Fallacy of Hasty Generalization

Back 14

Sampling error - making generalizations after having only encountered a few cases.

Front 15

Fallacy of Quoting Out of Context

Back 15

The careful manipulation of material printed or quoted where important information is withheld.

Front 16

Fallacy of Emphasis

Back 16

Incorrect emphasis of the words in a sentence. Improper stress is placed on some portion of a premise or conclusion so the meaning of the argument is distorted.

Front 17

Fallacy of Argumentum Ad Hominem

Back 17

Attacking the person and not the argument.

Front 18

Fallacy of Arguing from Authority

Back 18

When someone says something is true because a figure of power or fame has endorsed the same statement.

Front 19

Fallacy of Argument from Ignorance

Back 19

This argument contends that something must be true because there i no evidence to disprove it.

Front 20

Fallacy of Begging the Question

Back 20

This fallacy is also called a circle argument. This is an argument in which the premises used to prove a conclusion already assume the conclusion is true.

Front 21

Fallacy of Composition

Back 21

Attributes the characteristics of the parts of something to the whole thing itself.

Front 22

Fallacy of Division

Back 22

Attributes the characteristics of a whole thing to one or more of its parts.

Front 23

Fallacy of Appealing to Emotion

Back 23

Attempting to establish the validity of an argument, not with valid reasoning but rather in appealing to the passions, emotions, and prejudices of the audience.

Front 24

Fallacy of Irrelevant Conclusion

Back 24

An argument in which someone starts out to prove one thing and winds up proving something else.

Front 25

Deductive Argument

Back 25

The premises are intended to prove that the conclusion must be true. They move from the general to the specific, from the universal to the particular.

Front 26

Inductive Argument

Back 26

Attempt to establish that the conclusion is probably true. They move from the particular to the universal, from the specific to the general.

Front 27

Epistemology

Back 27

The branch of philosophy which attempts to define knowledge and explain how it is acquired.

Front 28

Empiricism

Back 28

A branch of epistemology that believes that important truths are determined by observation (5 senses).

Front 29

Rationalism

Back 29

A branch of epistemology which believes that knowledge is discovered through pure reason and/or how we use language or symbols.

Front 30

Metaphysics

Back 30

The branch of philosophy that attempts to answer the question: what is the ultimate reality?
(meta = beyond, physics = study of physical world)

Front 31

Aesthetics

Back 31

The branch of philosophy which asks questions such as: what is beautiful? What is art? What is the sublime? and related questions.

Front 32

Ethics

Back 32

The branch of philosophy which asks questions such as: What is wrong or right? What is the good life (or variations of that question)?

Front 33

Morality

Back 33

The branch of ethics which asks the question: What is right and what is wrong? How can one tell what is right or wrong?

Front 34

Philosophy

Back 34

The love of wisdom.
(philo = love, sophy = wisdom)

Front 35

Philosopher

Back 35

A lover of wisdom.

Front 36

4 Attributes of God

Back 36

Omnipotent
Omniscient
Omnipresent
Loving, providential

Front 37

Determinism

Back 37

Belief that antecedent causes determine your choices.

Front 38

Free Will/Indeterminism

Back 38

Belief that there are events that are uncaused in some sense.

Front 39

Compatibilism

Back 39

Belief that free will and determinism are compatible ideas.

Front 40

Syllogism

Back 40

A deductive argument that contains 2 (or more) premises and a conclusion.

Front 41

Satre

Back 41

Indeterminism view - what is generates what is not, therefore consciousness must be uncaused.

Front 42

Immanuel Kant

Back 42

Compatibilism view - we can view ourselves in two ways, as a part of nature where we are determined, or as a consciousness we are free.

Front 43

Thomas Hobbes

Back 43

Compatibilism view - we are free to the extent to which we are not externally contained.

Front 44

2 Classic Problems with 4 Attributes of God

Back 44

The Problem of Evil
-If God has all 4 attributes (omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, and loving, providential), why do bad things happen? How can he let people suffer?
The Problem of Human Freedom
-Are we moral agents?
-Does foreknowledge mean foreordained?