Midterm Explanations (1) hist

7/26/2019 Midterm Explanations (1) hist

1/4

PST 1101 Introduction to Philosophical Analysis Fall 2005

MID-TERM EXAM

I. Short Answer. For each of the four passages quoted belo! rite one paragraph in hich you1" point out assu#ptions that the author is #a$ing! and 2" state so#e further questions raised by

the passage. %10 points each"

In grading this section, I gave wide latitude to different kinds of answers. What I waslooking for, in general, were three things: 1) insight into the basic ideas of the passage,including connections with class readings and discussions; 2) ability to identify unstatedassuptions that the author of the passage is aking; and !) ability to generatethoughtful and even creative "uestions in response to the passage.

#or each of the passages below, I provide here a brief stateent on the background ofthe passage, as well as ideas for the kinds of assuptions and "uestions I was lookingfor.

1. Philosophers should rule cities! &for! hen accusto#ed! you ill see ten thousand ti#es betterthan the residents! and you ill recogni'e hat each i#age is! and hat is its original! because

you ha(e seen the truth of hich beautiful and )ust and good things are copies. And in this ay!for you and for us! the city is ruled in a a$ing state and not in a drea# li$e so #any of our

present cities! hich are #ostly co#posed of #en ho fight a#ong the#sel(es for shados! and

are at feud for the ad#inistration of affairs.* Plato!Republic! +oo$ ,I.

$his coes fro The Republic, in which %lato attepts to create an ideal city and thusdiscover the nature of &ustice. 't this point, he has &ust set out the 'llegory of the (avediscussed in class), in which a philosophical education is characteri*ed as an ascentfro the visible world iages on the wall of the cave) to the intelligible world the real

things of which the iages are ere copies). When a philosopher returns to the cave,she or he will not be +accustoed to the darkness for a while . . . though I didn-t epectyou to pick up on that precise connection.)

%lato assues: $here are true, intelligible fors of which real things are ere copies.%hilosophers are those who have grasped those fors, including the #or of the /ood.%hilosophers can use that knowledge to foster &ustice in society. 0veryone should listento philosophers and trust that they know the truth about what is good, &ust, beautiful, etc.

uestions: ow will those who are not philosophers know who is a philosopher and whois not3 Why should we trust philosophers to run things3 (an we count on their grasp ofthe ideaof &ustice to guarantee that their actions are &ust3

2. &-p to no e say the ai# of the Sceptic is tranquility in #atters of opinion and #oderationof feeling in #atters forced upon us. For Sceptics began to do philosophy in order to decide

a#ong appearances and to apprehend hich are true and hich false! so as to beco#e tranquil

but they ca#e upon equipollent dispute! and being unable to decide this they suspended

)udg#ent. And hen they suspended )udg#ent! tranquility in #atters of opinion folloed


2/4


fortuitously. . . . /e do not! hoe(er! ta$e S$eptics to be undisturbed in e(ery ay e say that

they are disturbed by things hich are forced upon the# for e agree that at ti#es they shi(er

and are thirsty and ha(e other feelings of this $ind. +ut in these cases ordinary people areafflicted by to sets of circu#stances by the feelings the#sel(es! and no less by belie(ing that

these circu#stances are bad by nature. Sceptics! ho shed the additional opinion that each of

these things is bad by nature! co#e off #ore #oderately e(en in these cases.* Setus 3#piricus!Outlines of Scepticism! I.ii.

$he background of this should be failiar enough; it-s another part of the sae workfro which we read ecerpts for class 4 only the title has been rendered differently inthe translation fro which I took this.

5etus assues: $ran"uility is good. 6oga is bad. 5keptics can distinguish betweenthings that are +forced upon us e.g., hunger, thirst) and general clais ade aboutthe by dogatists. 'll disputes end in e"uipollence; in other words, there is no way todecide for sure on any atter of knowledge, now or in the future. $here is a difference

between +bad for e and +bad by nature.

uestions: 6oes skepticis really lead to tran"uility3 (an huans really stand thatuch +suspense3 're there things forced upon us other than sensations andiediate bodily needs3 (ould soe kinds of abstract knowledge also be forced uponus3 ow can we tell3 Is this skepticis +urbane enough to avoid the trap pointed outby ue, in which we lapse into passivity until we die3

4. &I had shon hat #ust be the fabric of the ner(es and #uscles of the hu#an body to gi(e the

ani#al spirits so#ething li$e hat e ould call electric i#pulses6 contained in it the poer to#o(e the #e#bers . . . apart fro# the guidance of the ill. 7or ill this appear at all strange to

those ho are acquainted ith the (ariety of #o(e#ents perfor#ed by the different auto#ata! or

#o(ing #achines fabricated by hu#an industry! and that ith help of but a fe pieces co#paredith the great #ultitude of bones! #uscles! ner(es! arteries! (eins! and other parts that are found

in the body of each ani#al. such persons ill loo$ upon this body as a #achine #ade by the

hands of 8od! hich is inco#parably better arranged! and adequate to #o(e#ents #oread#irable than is any #achine of hu#an in(ention.* 9escartes!Discourse on Method! part fi(e.

$his is a slightly tricky one. 'gain, the background should be failiar. It coes fro awork 6escartes wrote in #rench the Meditationswere in 7atin) for a broader audience.

6escartes assues: 6ualis; ind and atter are different kinds of substance. 8attertakes up space and does not think. 8ind thinks and takes up no space. 9ature isbasically aterial. 8atter relates to atter only by divisibility, contact, pushing, etc. 4echanical relations. 5o, nature is a achine. $his drives hi to the conclusion thatthe huan body is a achine, as is the body of any anial.) ' huan being is a indassociated soehow) with a echanical body. Will is a faculty of the ind. 'nialbodies can ove without will. /od eists. /od is perfect. /od ade everything.


3/4


uestions: (ould we ever build a achine that thinks like a huan3 Would thisunderine 6escartes- clai that only inds can think3 Would it underine his claithat only /od could have ade huans3 ow does the will act on the anial spiritsnerve ipulses) to ove the body3 ow tightly coupled is will to the body3 ow likelyis it that y body can break loose, ove on its own3 Is this unfair to anials,

underestiating their cognitive abilities3 If chipan*ees, dolphins, and parrots canthink and will, does this ean that they have souls, or does it ean that we don-t3

:. &All the perceptions of the hu#an #ind resol(e the#sel(es into to distinct $inds! hich Ishall call I;Pu#e!A Treatise of Human Nature! +oo$ I %1?4@"

$his is really tricky, since we didn-t read ue for class. I cut a lot of slack in gradingthis one.

We did talk about soe of the background for this in class. ue is an epiricist. efollows 7ocke in solving the proble of correspondence i.e., the connection betweenideas and things) through the senses. 7ike 7ocke, ue subscribes to the (artesianodel of consciousness: the ind a.k.a. +the soul) is like a screen on which ideas arethrown. 7ike 7ocke, ue holds that the screen starts out blank. $he only way for newaterial to be pro&ected on the ind is through ipressions fro the senses eternalipressions) and fro eotion or +passions internal ipressions). Ideas are allderived fro those ipressions like faint copies that ay be cobined in various ways,

abstracted, etc. $he only way to ensure the truth of ideas is to prevent reason frocorrupting the path fro ipressions to ideas; any eddling done by the intellect, asidefro certain precertified procedures, will only distort. $he only way to distinguishipressions fro ideas since we only have access to our own consciousness 4 a(artesian assuption) is by their force or +liveliness. It-s sort of like 6escartes-standard of clarity and distinctness, &ust turned on its head.

5o, ue assues: $he ind is like a screen on which ideas are pro&ected. I onlyhave access to y own screen. $he screen starts out blank. $he only source ofaterial to be pro&ected on the screen is through ipressions ade by the senses andby the eotions. 'nd so on a lot of these are included in the above paragraph.)

uestions: 6oes the ind really start out blank3 8ight there be internal, rational+ipressions 4 that is, innate ideas that are forceful and +lively, as 6escartes thought3(an our eperience of the world really be reduced to bits of sensation ipacting on theind3 What is the connection between ipressions and ideas3 ow can really bigideas 4 like &ustice, beauty 4 find their origins in ere ipressions3


4/4


II. Essay. /rite a focused and ellorgani'ed argu#entati(e essay on one %1" of the folloing

topics. +e sure to start ith a clear and elldefined thesis! and pro(ide reasons for a general

reader to agree ith the thesis also be sure to state and respond to a reasonable ob)ection to yourthesis. +efore you start riting! ta$e a fe #inutes to thin$ about further questions raised by the

topic you ha(e chosen! and decide on an angle fro# hich you ill approach it. %B0 points"

1. Can (irtue be taughtD

2. Is it possible to be certain of anythingD

4. /hat is the appropriate role! if any! for philosophy in public lifeD

I looked for three things when grading the essay:

1. $05I5. I was looking for a clear and proinent stateent of a focused thesis; asingle clai or proposal that served as the heart of the essay. (oon thesis

probles can include: 9ot actually stating the thesis eplicitly; stating one thesis at thebeginning but drifting toward another thesis by the end of the essay; stating a thesis thatwas too broad or one that issed the point of the "uestion.

2. '>/?809$. I was looking for a wellorgani*ed and fairly welldeveloped arguent.$he clais that ake up the arguent should be less controversial than the thesis, andthey should fit together logically to support the thesis. 'ssuptions should be adeeplicit and supported by further, even less controversial clais. (oon arguentprobles include: siply restating the thesis, or offering supporting clais that are orecontroversial than the thesis; aking assuptions that ay be controversial to ageneral readership; not aking connections aong the supporting clais;

underdeveloped clais; lack of good organi*ation including clear paragraph structure).

!. #'I>9055. I was looking for 1) a good understanding of the basic ideas involved inthe essay, especially if the essay concerns in soe way the interpretation of one orore of the readings fro the course accuracy); 2) careful consideration of at least oneob&ection to the thesis, including reasons why the ob&ection is a good one and areasoned reply. (oon fairness probles include: isunderstanding orisrepresenting the ideas of another person; parodying opposing views rather thanconsidering the in their strongest for; using eotionladen language or outrightabuse; appealing to rhetorical "uestions assuing agreeent on the part of the reader)rather than reasons.

$he grade for the essay will appear as follows:

$ @@

Documents

Midterm Explanations (1) hist