Spring 2010 Philosophy of Human Nature Study Questions

Implicit Questions: To avoid having to specify lots of obvious study questions, let's say that study questions implicitly include questions about the basics elements of reading. In philosophy, this is usually easy to organize in terms of the topic and arguments. So, while I may not add an explicit question about the topic and argument of a reading, you should assume that you need to know this kind of basic information about everything we read.

1/12

1. What is philosophy?

2. What are rationales?

3. How would you use rationales and other methods to investigate the question

1/14

1. What is at stake in Euthyphro 10? Is what Socrates is asking of Euthyphro reasonable?

2. How does the Euthyphro have bearing on Socrates upcoming trial?

3. How does Socrates come across in both of these dialogues?

4. How are Logos, Theos, and Mythos related?

1/19

1. Summarize and evaluate Socrates' defense in the Apology? Evaluate.

2. Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the image of the philosopher which Plato presents us in the Apology.

4. How does Plato establish his view that ideas are more real than objects?

5. What is Plato's model of enlightenment?

6. Be prepared to explain the Allegory of the Cave and the Divided Line.

1/21

1. How does Plato think about the nature of the soul, its division into three parts? How might some suggest that Plato's view of human nature is "anti-body"?

2. How do the first three speeches in the Symposium reflect various cultural understandings and issues connected with love? Are these the same or different as concerns people have today?

3. How is Plato using each speech to introduce different types of theories of love? Can you think of reasons for or against different types of theories?

4. Review and comment on Kant's ideas about "enlightenment."

1/26

1. Distinguish propositional knowledge, knowledge by acquiantance, and know how from each other. Are these completely separate types of knowledge?

2. What are Gettier cases? Are they serious challenges to the traditional definition of knowledge?

3. Distinguish the major positions in epistemology (scepticism, empiricism, and rationalism) and begin to track strengths and weaknesses of these perspectives.

1/28

1. What insights did Aristophanes speech hold? How might it illustrate the limits of mythos on pursuing the truth about love?

2. Compare and contrast The Matrix, the Brain in the Vat thought experiment, and Descartes' thought experiment in Meditation 1. What epistemological problem do these situations help us explore? Do they provide insights?

3. What is Descartes' goal and method in Meditation 1?

2/2

1. Has Descartes re-established certainty about our knowledge of the world in Meditation 2?

2. How is the problem of knowledge similar for Descartes and for us? How is it different?

2. What is the point (and substance) of Socrates' questioning of Agathon?

2/4

1. Work through the various positions in empiricism (naive realism, indirect realism, idealism) showing the rationales and considerations that might move you from one to another. Assess empiricism in light of these positions and issues.

2. How do rationalists make their case for the importance of reason in knowledge? How did the Logical Positivists criticize them?

2/9

1. What is Diotima's view of love?

2. How are body and soul related in this theory?

3. What is the meaning of Alcibiades' entrance and speech?

2/11

1. According to Epicurus, should we fear the gods?

2. According to Epicurus, should we fear death?

3. According to Epicurus, what approach should we take to desire? (compare to Plato)

4. Read the Locke excerpt with a view to identifying what makes it a work of an empiricist. Can you notice specific parts of his theory that lend themselves to his empirical approach. What sorts of things does he have relatively more difficulty in explaining?

5. What is the problem of induction? What is the solution to the problem of induction, according to Hospers?

2/16

1. What is the "quietism" criticism of Epicureanism? How might an Epicurean defend him or herself from this objection?

2. Give a general assessment of Epicureanism which takes into account its theory of virtue and pleasure. How would an Epicurean respond to your assessment?

3. Is it possible that a form of asceticism might heighten one's experience of pleasure? Or, what is involved in savoring?

4. Learn the main positions in the Personal Identity issue, along with the strengths and weaknesses of each.

2/18

1. What intuition does the Brownson case test?

2. Why does Parfit think that "division cases" support a "psychological continuity" criterion? Do they solve the problem?

3. What position or approach to personal identity does Dennett's story/thought experiment, "Where Am I?" support?

4. How does Epictetus approach desire and aversion in the opening sections of the Enchiridion?

2/23

Midterm - no study questions

2/25

1. Compare and contrast Epicureanism and Stoicism on major points of their respective philosophies.

2. Critically evaluate Stoicism both as a philosophical attitude toward reality and reason and as a practical life philosophy.

3. Reconstruct and evaluate the Buddhist argument concerning the nature of the self, as reported by Siderits. Be sure to consider the specific arguments from impermanence and control. Include the "anti-reflexive" principle in your discussion.

3/2

1. Reconstruct and evaluate Bloom's view that multiple personalities might be normal? Does this evidence give us cluse about the nature of personal identity?

2. Evalauate the following thought experiment as you begin developing your theory of free will: Imagine that you have an important job and a family. You wake one morning to news reports of absolutely incontrovertible evidence that every moment of the universe is determined from the prior moment. What to you do after breakfast?

3/4

1. Identify and evaluate standard positions on free will such as determinism, indeterminism, compatibilism, and libertarianism.

2. How does Stace use an analysis of language as a philosophical method for discussing compatibilism?

3. Reconstruct Stace's account of compatibilism and critically evaluate it.

3/16

1. Do Buddhists make a good case for their claim about the pervasiveness of suffering?

2. Reconstruct and critically evaluate the Buddhist diagnosis of the conditions of our suffering.

3. What remedy is offered? Will it work?

4. Is there a paradox about liberation? What solutions might be offered?

3/18

How should we think about nirvana, according to Siderits? What are some flawed approaches?
How does a Buddhist answer the question, "Why be moral?"
In what way does enlightenment involve the two standpoints of conventional and ultimate truth?

3/23

Reconstruct Frankfort's argument on "alternative possibilities".
How does Frankfort's argument affect the free will and moral responsibility discussion?
Is truth or a commmitment to principles an obstacle to free will?
Is free will a matter of degree?

3/25

1. What is mindfulness and how is it related to Buddhist enlightenment?

2. What does mindfulness assume about our current psychology? Is this assumption correct?

3. Compare and contrast Buddhism, Christianity, and Humanism (Classical Greek and Hellenistic) in terms of their fundamental claims about the state that humans are in and the means for promoting human flourishing.

3/30

1. What kinds of experiences does Wegner look to to introduce the idea of "illusion of conscious control"?

2. What is the I Spy experiment?

3. What three principles does Wegner find that influence our illusion of conscious will?

4. Identify critical issues with psychological evidence to show that conscious will is an illusion and give your view of the evidence?

4/1

4/6

1. What are some typical ways of defining religion and classifying types of religious belief?

2. Is there a difference between religion and spirituality?

3. What would the effect of a "proof" or "demonstration" have on contemporary religion (God @ JFK)?

4. How do naturalists (contemporary social scientists) study religion?

4/8

No Class

4/13

1. Reconstruction and evaluate each of the proofs for the existence of God we discussed.

4/15

1. Reconstruct and evaluate the logical and evidentiary problems of evil.

4/20

No Class.

4/22

1. What happened to Carlton Pearson?

2. What does it mean to be a heretic?

3. What does the possibility of heresy tell us about the nature of religious identity and community?

4. Is religion completely compatible with intellectual freedom? Is it a problem if it isn't?

5. How open or flexible is/should/could a religious denomination be to "heresies" or divergent thinking?

4/27

1. Should religions operate within the limits of rights?

2. Do Christians need to be so Greek?