PHL100 Problems of Philosophy, past assignments




Past Assignments
26 January: read pages 1-36 in Sober.

28 January: read pages 114-116 in Sober. Be sure that you know the five ways that Aquinas cites -- they'd be a great quiz question. Also, try to reconstruct Aquinas's arguments, and ask yourself (1) are the arguments valid, (2) do you accept the premises, and (3) what does the argument prove, if it is valid and you accept the premises? For help, you may also want to read pages 37-52, which is Sober's explanation of the text.

31 January: read pages 125-128. Can you recreate Anselm's argument in a brief outline form? For help, you may also want to read pages 82-90.

2 February: read pages 116-118 in Sober. Helpful also are pages 52-60. Ask yourself, what kind of argument is this? What is the difference between the cases of the rock and watch?

2 February: reading quiz 1.

4 February: read pages 98-105 in Sober. Can you recreate a 2x2 grid showing the options in Pascal's Wager?

7 February: read pages 201-208 in Sober. This is a passage from a dialogue, a kind of philosophy play, written by Plato. As you read it, ask yourself: What is the naive view of knowledge that Socrates criticizes? What alternative view, if any, does he offer?

11 February: read pages 208-220 in Sober. This is a selection from Descartes's Meditations. What is Descartes's task in this book, as described in Meditation 1? What does Descartes find, in Meditation 2, that he cannot doubt? Why can it not be doubted?

11 February:quiz 2.

14 February: read pages 220-230 in Sober. What work does God do for Descartes's philosophy? Can you summarize Descartes's argument for the existence of God? Is it a valid argument?

16 February: read pages 230-235 in Sober. Why does Descartes have a problem with error now? How does he solve this problem?

18-23 February: review our notes on the nature of scientific theory.

23 February: hand back your answers to the question sheet for the documentary. The questions were: 1. Identify at least two examples of an unfalsifiable claim in the documentary. Note that it is OK if you describe what you believe is an implicit claim -- that is, sometimes people were clearly asking you to believe something without stating it, and you can state the claim you believe is at stake. 2. Identify at least two examples where a supernatural explanation fails to beat out a scientific explanation, judging by one of the criteria for choosing between theories (predictive power, consistency with existing theory, simplicity). Here are some potential answers:
  • Unfalsifiable claims:
    • Whatever was written on the horoscopes given out in class. It worked just as well for each person as it did for any other.
    • The predictions of the palm reader. He found that if he said what he wanted, or just the opposite, people believed him equally well.
    • The claim that the water at the clinic in Russia was empowered with some measurable force. Every attempt to test the measurement resulted in them claiming it could not be tested.
  • Applying the three criteria:
    • The theory that Poppoff talked to God is more less simple than the theory that he depends solely upon messages from his wife (since we know in both cases he gets messages from his wife).
    • The theory that Geller bends the spoons beforehand is more consistent with existing scientific theories than is the theory that he bends them with his mind.
    • The theory that some people can reach inside others and do "psychic surgery" is less consistent with scientific theory than is the theory that they fake the "psychic surgery".
    • The theory that we cannot influence peoples blood pressure with thought alone has less predictive power than the theory that we cannot, as shown by the fact that the latter better predicted the test results in the double blind test.

28 February: we start talking about the philosophy of mind. Read Descartes in Sober, page 239-249. What are some of Descartes's arguments that the mind is not the body?

2 March: read Smart in Sober, pages 339-343. What is the position that Smart is arguing for? What objections does he consider? What are his answers to these objections?

7 March: read Turing in Sober, pages 343-364. What is the question that Turing is considering? What is the test or criterion that Turing suggests (in sections 1 and 2)?

9 March: first in class exam. Topics will include:
  • What are some of the branches of philosophy? What are the questions each addresses?
  • What is a valid argument?
  • What do philosophers mean when they refer to "a philosopher's god"?
  • What are Aquinas's five arguments for the existence of God?
  • Describe Anselm's ontological argument. Is it valid? If not, what might be wrong with it? If so, are all the premises true?
  • What is the design argument? What kind of argument is it?
  • What is knowledge, according to Theatetus in Plato's dialogue? What are some problems with this view? Does Socrates come to an answer about what knowledge is?
  • What is the first thing that Descartes finds he cannot doubt? (This occurs in Meditation 2.) Describe why we cannot doubt it, according to him (Descartes argues that doubting it is contradictory -- show how this might be).
  • Why does Descartes's argument for the existence of God require then an explanation of error? (This is the main issue of Meditation 4.) And how does error arise, according to Descartes? Explain his notion of both understanding and of will.
  • What is rationalism? What is empiricism? What is foundationalism?
  • What is the deductive nomological method with falsificationism? Use an example to illustrate the method.
  • What does it mean to say that a scientific hypothesis must be falsifiable? What is an example of an unfalsifiable claim? Why is an unfalsifiable claim about nature problematic, according to scientific method?
  • Let us understand a theory to be (at least) a collection of hypotheses. Let us understand a scientific theory to be one that has been created through application of the deductive nomological method with falsificationism. There can be more than one scientific theory to explain some phenomenon. What are the criteria that we use to chose between such theories, in rank order of their importance? Illustrate each with an example of two theories that differ by such a criterion. Your theory examples can be very simple -- the point is to show you understand what the criteria actually mean.
  • What is the Duhem thesis? Explain it, perhaps with an example. How does it alter the deductive nomological method with falsificationism?
11 March: play with Eliza before class, and read the Chinese room thought experiment handout. Be able to describe the thought experiment and what it shows (according to Searle).

21 March: review of exam 1. If time: philosophy of mind review. Chinese room thought experiment.

23 and 25 March: no class. I'm out of town on March 23, and classes are canceled campus-wide on March 25.

28 and 30 March: we may review philosophy of mind, but we also want to move on to the topic of free will. Please read Hume in Sober, pages 364-378. This would be a great day for a quiz on Hume, to get us back into the swing of things. While reading Hume, ask yourself:
  • According to Hume, are the material operations of the world fully determined? That is, are their actions necessary?
  • Why does Hume believe any necessity in nature may apply to human behavior?
  • Hume argues that we need to get more clear about the meaning of "liberty." What is his definition? Read page 372 carefully.
You may also find it helpful to read Sober's discussion on pages 307-315.

30 March: Quiz 3.

1 April: read Campbell in Sober, pages 378-389.

4 April: read Skinner in Sober, pages 378-389.

6 April: we review free will, if there is anything left to discuss, and then we start a discussion of ethics.

8 April: we will have a brief, in class exam, before beginning our discussion of Plato's discussion of the Divine Command Theory and the relation of ethics to religion. Topics for the exam are philosophy of mind and free will. The test will be some combination of multiple choice and short answer questions. I may ask a question from the first exam. New study questions include:
  • What is interactive substance dualism? Explain each term as you explain this view. Descartes is our best example of such a theorist.
  • What is materialism (that is, physical monism)? Smart was our best example of such a view.
  • What is the Turing test? What question is it meant to avoid, and what is the test meant to show?
  • What is compatibilism? How does Hume define liberty (free will) so that he can claim compatibilism?
  • What is libertarianism (about free will)? What evidence does Campbell see for the belief that we have free will?
  • What is determinism? What reasons does Skinner offer to believe we are not free (in the usual sense of "free")?
In addition, please read Plato, selection from the The Euthyphro, in Sober pages 466-478. While reading, ask yourself:
  • What is the question that Socrates ask Euthyphro to answer for him (see page 469)?
  • Do Socrates and Euthyphro finally conclude that piety is what the god's love?

11 April: please read the selection from Mill's Utilitarianism in Sober pages 486-497. While reading, ask yourself:
  • What is the good, according to Mill?
  • How do we decide how to act, according to Mill?
  • What is utilitarianism?
You will also find it very helpful to read Sober, pages 430-445.
15, 18 April: read Kant in Sober, pages 520-529. While reading, ask yourself:
  • What is good, according to Kant?
  • What is the Categorical Imperative?
You will also find it very helpful to read Sober pages 446-454.

22, 25 April: read Sartre in Sober, pages 478ff.