The final will cover the material we have covered after the midterm exam. (However, in some cases it will be helpful to remember material and be able to apply material from earlier in the semester. For example, our discussion of identity through time is highly relevant to issues about personal identity; and a good grip on the variety of metaphysical issues and approaches to them would be very helpful in writing an essay on the challenges to metaphysics.)
There are notes on most of the major topics we have discussed since the midterm on the TLEARN site (and also on the course web site), and these may help you to organize your thoughts for the examination. Of course, you should also review the readings! The notes do not contain enough material to enable you to do well on the exam without also consulting the texts! (Some readings were handed out in class -- if you're missing any of them, you should get a copy from me.)
| Overview of Topics and Readings |
1. Teleological Argument (Argument from Design)
Readings: van Inwagen, chapter 9; Sober, "The Design Argument."
Handouts: notes on vI chapter 9.
2. Dualism vs. Physicalism
Readings: van Inwagen, chapters 10 and 11. (Chapter 11 is on personal identity, but also constitutes the conclusion of vI's discussion of dualism.)
Handouts: pdf handout on vI chapter 10; web page on vI chapter 11.
3. Personal Identity
Readings: van Inwagen, chapter 11; Big Questions, chapters 35 (Shoemaker), 36 (Parfit), and 37 (Swinburne); Dennett, "Where Am I?"
Handouts: notes on vI chapter 11 (also referenced above); personal identity overview.
4. Free Will
Readings: van Inwagen, chapter 12; Dennett, chapter 4 of Freedom Evolves; selection from Wegner, The Illusion of Conscious Will; Big Questions, chapter 42 (O'Connor).
Handouts: pdf notes on Dennett
5. Challenges to Metaphysics
Readings: Big Questions, chapters 43-45 (Quine, Putnam, Putnam); 54-56 (Carnap, Flax, Witt)
| Part I: Short-Answer Questions |
The first part of the exam will contain 8 questions asking for brief descriptions of some of the key ideas we have discussed. By "brief" I mean a short paragraph -- in the neighborhood of two or three sentences. Answers should be clear and precise as well as concise! (8 questions * 5 points each = 40 points total for this part.)
| Part II: Essay Questions |
I will list three of the following questions on the exam, and ask you to write on two. Answers to the essay questions will be graded on (1) the degree of familiarity with, and understanding of, the details of the readings exhibited by your answers; (2) quality of philosophical argument, and degree to which you consider and respond to views opposed to your own; (3) clarity of organization and expression. (30 points * 2 essays = 60 points total for this section.)
1. Give a careful explanation of the "fine-tuning" or "cosmic" version of the argument from design. Discuss at least two criticisms of this argument (drawn from van Inwagen's discussion and/or Sober's discussion). Conclude with an overall assessment of the plausibility of the argument.
2. Discuss and evaluate two of the arguments for dualism that van Inwagen considers, and also two of the arguments against dualism that he considers. Conclude with an overall assessment and defense or critique of dualism. (Feel free to consider additional arguments at this stage of the essay if it will help you make your case.)
3. Give an example that illustrates the possibility of fission in personal identity. (Let's say A undergoes fission, and the resulting people are B and C.) Now consider the question which of the resulting people is identical with the original person. Explain the reasons for thinking that "neither," "both," "B," and "C" are all bad answers. What is the correct answer, on your view, and why?
4. Dennett consider three answers to the question where he is: where his brain is, where the rest of his body is, and where his point of view is. What can you infer from the story about what he thinks the correct answer is? Include discussion of this passage: "It occurred to me then, with one of those rushes of revelation of which we should be suspicious, that I had stumbled upon an impressive demonstration of the immateriality of the soul based upon physicalist principles and premises. For as the last radio signal between Tulsa and Houston died away, had I not changed location from Tulsa to Houston at the speed of light? And had I not accomplished this without any increase in mass? What moved from A to B at such speed was surely myself, or at any rate my soul or mind -- the massless center of my being and home of my consciousness . . . I could not see how a physicalist philosopher could quarrel with this except by taking the dire and counter-intuitive route of banishing all talk of persons." What do you think Dennett's own attitude toward this argument is? What is yours, and why?
5. We have considered three main attempts to solve the problem of personal identity. These are: (1) the psychological continuity account defended by Shoemaker (which refines Locke's earlier memory account); (2) the dualist account (closely related to what Parfit calls "the Ego theory") defended by Swinburne; and (3) Parfit's "Bundle view" (which he elsewhere calls "the complex view"). Explain these three accounts, then argue for whichever one you believe is closest to the truth (or propose an alternative to all three and defend it).
6. Discuss and evaluate at least two of Dennett's arguments against libertarianism. (Or one of Dennett's and van Inwagen's "mystery" of libertarianism.) Conclude with an overall assessment of libertarianism. (Feel free to consider additional arguments at this stage of the essay if it will help you make your case.)
7. Explain and evaluate two of the challenges to metaphysics we considered at the end of the semester (Quine's arguments for the indeterminacy of translation, and the resulting ontological relativity; Carnap's verificationist critique of metaphysics as meaningless; and the challenge of feminist postmodernism, as defended by Flax and criticized by Witt). Conclude with your own assessment of the viability of metaphysical questions and issues.
|
Last update: December 2, 2007 |