Study Material For Philosophy Test 1

Front 1

philosophy means

Back 1

love of wisdom

thinking about thinking

qust for truth for wisdom

fundamental questions of reality

goal: systematic worldview

Front 2

moral philsophy is ethics

Back 2

study of values and customs of a preson or group

analysis of concepts
* right and wrong *good and evil *reponsibility

Front 3

metaphysics

BEYOND NATURE

Back 3

study or theory of reality being an dknowing, study of existence
* is the world real or an illusion

study of what makes life meaningful

Front 4

epistoemology branches off into

Back 4

rationalism & empiricism

Front 5

define epistemology

Back 5

theory of knowledge

Front 6

define reationalism

a priori; prior to exp

Back 6

view that knowledge comes from operations of reason NOT experience

logic

Front 7

define empiricism

a posterori; from what follows, dependent on exp

Back 7

view that all knowledge dervies from sense experience

use science

acq by senses

Front 8

define ethics

Back 8

study of fquestions of right and wrong

ow we should behave and treat others

Front 9

ethics; consequentialism

Back 9

goodness or badness of consequenses of an action determines whether the action is good/right or bad/wrong morally

Front 10

deontological ethics

Back 10

rightness of action is not determined on teh basis of the consequences of action; action matters, motive/intention

Front 11

what are other areas of philosophy

Back 11

social and political phil: study of social issues

aesthetics or philospy of art: study of nature of beauty and waht art is

tules and critical thinking: rules of correctreasoning

phil of God, religion, sci. law

Front 12

place and time, beginning of western phil

Back 12

Miletus, in Ionia, the Greek colony on the SW coast of Asia Minor-- now Turkey and athens in 5th & 4th cent

Front 13

wonder

Back 13

curiosity, pursuit of knowledge for own sake

thought or use of reason

"scientific" systematic form of investigation

Front 14

myth to logos

Back 14

move away from mythical explanations of reality

b4 there were religious explanations of natural phenomenon

Front 15

role of illiad and odyssey

Back 15

main texts to educate greeks

Front 16

myths

Back 16

1. stories about persons or gods/society/culture
2. offer explanations but no justification 4 explanations
3. can be more than one explanation

Front 17

MATERIALISTS

Back 17

focused on matter, material world, answer basic questions baotu relatiy, no religion

Front 18

logos

Back 18

reason

Front 19

THALES

Back 19

1st philosopher, also an astronomer
thougth water was source

Front 20

AMAXINADER

Back 20

believed that the source and basic element of things are infinity

theory of evolution, life appeared in water and humans evolved from fish/like creatures

Front 21

THE SOPHISTS

Back 21

"those who are wise"

contrast to philooshoers, relativists denying abolute truths

educators charging fees for services

Front 22

Sophists emphasized solutions to practical problms

Back 22

not philosophical inquires abotu reality

Front 23

the sophists taught rhetoric

Back 23

art of writing and speaking effectivly

accused of teaching insincere language to get best out of an argument- even if arg was weak

Front 24

sophsits rep

Back 24

came to mean something BAD

manuplated ppl, not dealing w/ issues straight

Front 25

PROTAGORAS

Back 25

sophist

"mean is the measure of things"

no absolute principles of goodness, beautiy, truth, justice

relative to views of ppl/cultre

men set standards, measured dependent on coircumstance and situation

Front 26

SOCRATES

Back 26

*turned focus of philosophical analysis to ethical questions

emphasis: examination of one's beliefs

question beleifs and expose false ones

GADFLY

Front 27

SOCRATIC METHOD/DIALECTIC/S

Back 27

-form of dialogue, a question and answer method involving exchanges and analyses of opinion/beliefs, testing provisional def to establish the truth of basic concepts

Front 28

goal of socratic method

Back 28

establish right definition and descovery of enduring principles--aiming at clarification, not always answers or refection of false beliefs

Front 29

aim of moral theory

Back 29

providing a decision procedure for making correct moral judgementgs and theoretical aim of providing moral critical that explani the underlying nature of morality

Front 30

SIX desiperata/characteristics

Back 30

1. consistency
2, determinary
3. intuitive appeal
4. internal support
5. explanatory power
6. eternal support

Front 31

CONSISTENCY

Back 31

a moral theory should be consistent that its principles, together with factual info yield consistant moral verdicts about the morality of actrions, ersons, and other objects of moral evaluation

Front 32

DETERMINARY

Back 32

must be clear and not vague

essential to be moral
must feature: belief about moarlity, our considered moral beliefs, our nonmoral beliefs and assumptions

Front 33

INTUITIVE APPEAL

Back 33

a moral theory should develop and make sense of various intuitively appealing belifs and ideas abotu morality

Front 34

INTERNAL SUPPORT

Back 34

relevan factual info
strong support
implies belif

Front 35

EXPLANATORY POWER

Back 35

a moral theory attempts to discover not only moral principles that logically imply our considered moral belifs BUT ALSO principles that explain what it is about actions that makes them right or wrong

matter of degree, look at situation

Front 36

EXTERNAL SUPPORT

Back 36

way they are NOT what they should be

establishes beliefs and assumptions

Front 37

normative ethics falls under ethics and it

Back 37

attempts to answer MORAL questions

Front 38

metaethics falls under ethics and

Back 38

attempts to answer NON moral questions about morality, technical things

Front 39

moral theory falls under normative ethics

Back 39

general moral questions

what to do, how to be

Front 40

applied ethics falls under normative ethics

Back 40

specific moral questions about abortion, animals, environment, violence, sex, death penalty etc

Front 41

moral semantics falls under metaethics

Back 41

qeustions about the meaning of moral statements

Front 42

moral metaphysics falls under metaethics

Back 42

question about the nature and existence of oral facts

Front 43

moral epistemology falls under metaetchis

Back 43

questions about knowledge and justification of moral statements

Front 44

moral theory

Back 44

attempts to discover true or correct moral principles AND justifies or proves moral principles

Front 45

moral principle

Back 45

receives WEAK internal support when the principle is emrely consistent w/ considered moral beliefs

Front 46

moral rule

Back 46

less general than a principle and states that some specific type of action is right or wrong

specif: raise hand
more general: equality which is a principle

Front 47

Nonmoral actions or events:

Back 47

those areas of interest where moral categories cannot be applied.

b. For example, wondering whether one should eat grapefruit, wear socks of a specific shade of color, or part your hair on the left side of the head are all usually considered nonmoral issues. Yet there are circumstances where such actions could have moral consequences.

Front 48

Immoral actions

Back 48

those areas of interest where moral categories do apply and of are such a kind as to be evil, sinful, or wrong according to some code or theory of ethics.

a. Telling a lie is c.p. an immoral action.










b. An immoral action then can be defined as a violation of a rule or code of ethics.










c. Strictly speaking, on the one hand, an action could be considered immoral on the basis of one rule, code, or theory and, on the other hand, be considered moral or even nonmoral on another rule, code, or theory. Such examples are common from the point of view of sociological or moral relativism.

Front 49

Amoral actions

Back 49

those areas of interest exhibiting indifference to and not abiding by the moral rules or codes of society.

Front 50

amoral

Back 50

a. Note that an amoral action by one person could be considered nonmoral (or even immoral) by a specific society, depending upon the moral code of the society.













1. If I tell a lie without concern for the moral concepts of a society of what is good and bad, then c.p. I have acted amorally. (Notice how such a view makes the use of "amoral" intentional.)













2. For example, a sociopath, sometimes called a person without a conscience, and a very young child are called "amoral" because such people have no feeling or understanding of the concepts of right and wrong.










b. If I tell a lie without concern for the moral rules of society and it is a "white" lie and "white" lies are permissible in that society, then I am actually acting amorally. Nevertheless, my action is considered to be by the rules of that society nonmoral or morally permissible.










c. The "white" lie told in a society where such actions are against the moral code would be considered an immoral action and would be called "wrong."
d. It should be noted that "amoral" is sometimes used in ordinary language in the same way that "nonmoral" is used. Many dictionaries indicate the terms are synonymous. E.g., the American Heritage Dictionary (4th ed. 2000) defines "unmoral" as "1. Having no moral quality; amoral. 2. Unrelated to moral or ethical considerations; nonmoral."










e. In this course, based on the reasons stated above, the distinction between "amoral" and "nonmoral" is observed.

Front 51

define reasoning

Back 51

process of drawing inferences of reaching a conclusion from a set of premises

Front 52

define argument

Back 52

a set of one ormore premises plus a conclusion drawn form them

Front 53

types of arguments or reasoning

Back 53

inductive and deductive

Front 54

define logic

Back 54

study of methods and principles by which we distinguish correct from incorrect reasonin

Front 55

if an argument is deductive and the reasoining in it is correct, the argument is _______-

Back 55

valid

Front 56

define valid deductive argument

Back 56

one twhose conclusino follws necessarily from the premises

premises are true, conclusion MUST be true as well

necessarily truth preserving

Front 57

define sound

Back 57

valid arguments having only true premises

Front 58

define sound argument

Back 58

guarantee the truth of their conslusions

Front 59

define cogent

Back 59

strong inductive argument w/ only true premises

Front 60

goal of deduction

Back 60

truth of premises guarantee truth of conclusion

Front 61

chars of deduction

Back 61

demonstrative; conclusion already contained in the premises (doesn’t go beyond it);
conclusion follows necessarily from the premises

Front 62

validity

Back 62

Deductive logic (the connection or relation btwn conclusion and premise/s): it
applies to the argument as a whole: the argument is valid or invalid. Whether there’s a
relationship btwn the premises or conclusion

Front 63

truth

Back 63

The term applies to propositions or statements. Be concerned with the truth of
the premises. TRUTH PRESERVING. All premises are true -> conclusion must be true

Front 64

Soundness

Back 64

validity and truth: valid arguments with true premises

Front 65

 Induction

Back 65

 Probability; truth of premise does not guarantee truth of conclusion; if premises are true, conclusion may still be false.
 Amplifying: conclusion goes beyond premises—generalizing