Philosophy 1301: Introduction to
Philosophy
Review for First Examination
Fall, 2007
Curtis Brown
The first exam is scheduled for Monday,
October 1. The examination will have two parts. The first part will have
relatively short questions that you should be able to answer in about a
paragraph. The second part will have longer essay questions that may require
several paragraphs to answer. Answers should show familiarity with the text as
well as class lectures. Answers will be evaluated on the basis of their clarity,
accuracy, completeness, and cogency. The first and second parts will each count
for approximately half of the total grade. Bring a blue
book! (I will trade the one you bring for one that I have marked prior to
the exam. Only the blue books I hand out will be acceptable.) I expect
students to remain in the classroom until they have completed the exam. (If
you finish early, you are welcome to turn it in and leave.) No mp3 players,
cell phones, etc. -- all you should have out is a blue book and something to
write with.
Terms and concepts you should be familiar
with:
- epistemology
- metaphysics
- axiology (value theory)
- argument
- deductive argument
- validity
- soundness
- begging the question
- logical form
- conditional
- antecedent
- consequent
- contrapositive
- converse
- you should be able to say whether argument forms we have discussed are
valid or not (examples: (a) if P then Q; P; therefore Q; (b) if P then Q; not
P; therefore not Q; (c) if P then Q; not Q; therefore not P; (d) if P then Q;
Q; therefore P; (e) not: (P and Q); therefore (not P or not Q).) For invalid
argument forms, you should be able to show that they are invalid by producing
a counterexample.
- inductive argument
- abductive argument
- you should be able to say how inductive and abductive arguments are
similar and how they are different; should be able to explain conditions that
are required for a good inductive or abductive argument.
- you should be able to examine a sample argument and say whether (and why)
it is deductive, inductive, or abductive.
- you should be able to examine a sample argument and say whether it is a
good argument or a bad argument, and why
- surprise principle
- "only game in town" fallacy
- redundancy theory of truth
- modest favoring
- first-cause (cosmological) argument
- "birthday fallacy"
- teleological argument (argument from design)
- argument from analogy
- natural selection (requires (a) variations among organisms that (b) are
inherited and (c) affect fitness)
- global vs. local why-questions
- natural phenomena vs. supernatural phenomena
- metaphysical naturalism
- methodological naturalism
- ontological argument
- "Lost Island"
- a priori vs. a posteriori propositions
- analytic sentence
- synthetic sentence
- testability theory of meaningfulness
(advocated by the logical positivists)
- direct vs. indirect testability
- auxiliary assumptions
- expected utility
- wager argument
- problem of evil
- theodicy vs. defense
- moral vs. natural evil
- object knowledge, propositional knowledge, know-how knowledge
- JTB theory of knowledge
- you should be able to give examples that show that knowledge is not
justified true belief
- individually necessary and jointly sufficient conditions (you should know how necessary and
sufficient conditions are related to sentences of the form "if P, then Q" and
also how they are related to the problems of a definition being too broad or
too narrow)
essay questions
Essay questions will ask
you to explain and evaluate an argument we have discussed in class. To explain
an argument, you should say what the premises are, what the conclusion is, what
sort of argument it is, and how the premises are supposed to support the
conclusion. To evaluate the argument, you need to consider objections to the
argument and explain why you think they are or are not justified. An objection
to an argument may be either a reason to think one or more of the premises is
false, or a reason to think that the premises do not support the
conclusion.
Essay questions may be either general (for example: "Explain
Aquinas's cosmological or first-cause argument. Then explain and evaluate two of
the objections to the argument discussed in class and/or the text") or more
specific (for example: "explain and evaluate the free will response to the
problem of evil").Main arguments you should be prepared to write about:
ontological argument, cosmological argument, argument from design, wager
argument, positivist argument that religious language is meaningless, problem of
evil.