1. Explain Locke’s empiricist view of the structure and contents of the human mind. Include discussion of: (a) what sorts of simple ideas there are; (b) how we get simple ideas; (c) how complex ideas are derived from simple ones; (d) the relation between ideas in our minds and qualities in objects, including Locke’s distinction between primary and secondary qualities; (d) Locke’s account of perception, sometimes called the “representative theory of perception.”

2. Explain Locke’s doctrine that all knowledge is of the agreement and disagreement of ideas, and the consequences of this doctrine for the extent of our knowledge. Include discussion of: (a) the four kinds of agreement and disagreement of ideas (not just their names, but what they mean); (b) the three degrees of knowledge (intuitive, demonstrative, and sensitive); (c) which degrees of knowledge we can have about which kinds of agreement and disagreement of ideas, and why; (d) how much Locke thinks we can know about coexistence and real existence, and why he thinks we cannot know more; (e) whether Locke is entitled to think we know even as much as he says we do about coexistence and real existence.

3. Explain Hume’s skepticism about induction and causation. Include discussion of the following: (a) what does Hume think the possible sources of knowledge are? Why does he think that none of these sources can give us reason to think that the future will resemble the past? (b) what is Hume’s “skeptical solution” to his skeptical doubts about our tendency to form beliefs about the future? (c) what are ideas, for Hume? Where do they come from? Why is there a problem about our idea of necessary connection? (d) what does Hume think our idea of necessary connection really amounts to? (Note that he doesn’t deny that there is such an idea; it’s just that he thinks it refers to a connection in us rather than to a connection in nature.) (e) conclude with a general discussion of Hume’s views about the dangers of excessive skepticism and the uses of mitigated skepticism, as described in section XII of the Enquiry.

4. Kant said that the characteristic vice of rationalism was dogmatism, and the characteristic vice of empiricism was skepticism. Explain what he means by this, and how he proposes to avoid these two vices. Include discussion of the following: (a) what is “dogmatism”? Why does rationalism tend to lead to dogmatism? (b) Why does Kant think that empiricism naturally tends to lead to skepticism? (c) does your study of Locke and Hume lead you to think Kant is correct in his assessment of empiricism? Why or why not? (d) Explain Kant’s view that intuitions and concepts are both necessary for knowledge. (e) How does Kant use this view about the sources of knowledge to avoid dogmatism? (f) How does he try to avoid skepticism? (g) To what extent do you think Kant succeeds in thwarting skepticism?

5. Compare Kant’s views about the source of the Categories with Locke’s views on substance and Hume’s views on causation. Discuss: (a) what does Locke mean by the idea of substance in general? Why does he think we need this idea? (b) why does Locke think that it is hard to explain where the idea of substance in general comes from? (c) Why does Hume think that the idea of causation as a necessary connection between objects cannot be acquired from experience? (d) Where does Kant think that the ideas of substance and causation come from? (e) Why does Kant think that these ideas must be applicable to experience? (In responding to this part of the question, include some discussion of the “Transcendental Deduction of the Categories.”)

6. Discuss the problem of skepticism in Locke, Hume, and Kant. (a) What aspects of Locke’s views seem to lead to skepticism, and why? (Consider e.g. Locke’s representative theory of perception and his related view that all our knowledge concerns the relations of ideas.) (b) To what extent is Locke skeptical about our knowledge of the external world? (Think especially of his views about coexistence and real existence.) (c) Why isn’t he even more skeptical, especially about real existence? How good are his reasons? (d) Explain Hume’s skepticism about the possibility of our knowledge of causal laws. (e) Explain Kant’s response to Humean skepticism about causation. Include discussion of the importance of the distinction between appearances and things in themselves.

7. Compare Locke, Hume and Kant on freedom of action. Discuss: (a) what does Locke think freedom (“liberty”) consists in? (b) why does Locke think that the notion of “free will” is incoherent? (c) Why does Hume think that freedom (liberty) is compatible with determinism (“necessity”)? (d) How does Hume’s view about freedom depend on his views about the nature of necessary connection? (e) What does Kant think freedom consists in? (f) How does Kant think that the distinction between the empirical world and the world of things-in-themselves enables us to say that freedom is compatible with determinism? (g) In what ways does Kant agree and disagree with Locke and Hume on this issue?