Sample Exams: ALL of the following were with different texts, but
Study Sheet (for a different year):
1) Discuss different concepts of divinity and how they fulfill or don't fulfill both psychological needs and what one might call intellectual requirements. Worry a bit about, "I hope or need a God, therefore I believe in God." What is the problem with saying, "God is unknowable or ineffable?" Give one argument against the view that there is personal survival of death.
2) Discuss the argument from Design, its logical structure and how it has special relevance to the problem of evil. See the handout on the Teleological Argument, lecture and Blackburn 163-168. Be able to show how it is an analogical argument, and show how it is a weak analogical argument. Perhaps you can even say something about what it MEANS to say that something is designed and what inferences can or can't be made.
3) Problem of Evil. Exactly what is the problem? That is, what questions does any answer have to meet? When people use the "God gave us free will" answer, exactly what concept of "free will" is being used? Is it coherent? Be able to list possible answers; be able to spell out at least some of these answers. And be able to reply to the answers. What is the "vale of tears" answer (see Blackburn) And, the reply. What is the point of Blackburn's "dorms and management" story (p. 170.) What is a William Tell test and what is its relevance to the problem of evil?
My intention is to say something about Faith and Pascal's Wager Argument (185-189), so you should have some idea about issues surrounding the connections, or lack thereof, between faith and knowledge (reason - evidence.) Is faith a form of knowledge? Can you get truths by faith that you cannot get by knowledge? Is there a difference between trust and blind faith? We discussed Clifford's Ethics of Belief? Do you think it is morally irresponsible to believe something solely on the basis of faith.
Should have general idea of the Ontological Argument & the Cosmological Argument (general characteristics, who proposed them) from Blackburn.
Handouts or on Web
Terminology (web)
The Ontological Argument, The Cosmological Argument and The Teleological Argument or Argument from Design (handouts - emails)
Email on possible answers to the Problem of Evil (handout was part of this)
Mayo's analysis of the "testing ground" criticism.
PROBLEMS OF PHILOSOPHY: FINAL, DECEMBER 19, 2000
I. Do SIX of the following: 5 points each
1. What is evil in Vedanta philosophy/religion (related by Sophie in Does God Exist?)
2. Define or identify:
Theodicy
Thomas Aquinas
Anthropomorphism
Brahman-Atman
Agnositc
3. What is key feature of an analogical argument or what is the usual method of attacking such an argument.
4. What is strong atheism, and what is one reason given in its support?
5. How does Mayo's reply to the claim that God only permits evil; he does not cause it?
6. "To take cause is to take away the effect." What is the point? What is the reply?
7.What is wrong with this answer to evil: "It all turns out good in the long run."
8. Why is the theory of evolution a threat to the argument from design?
1. Thoroughly examine either the cosmological or the teleological argument. Set out the best version you can and then analyze it, that is, give the arguments of the skeptic. What do you think of the argument? Convincing? Silly? Irrelevant?
2. A Exactly what is the problem of evil and why is it a challenge to the usual Judaic-Christian view? Consider the following attempts to answer the problem, and show the problems with these answers:
a) evil is a result of free will
b) earthly life is a testing ground
c) we need evil in order to be able to experience good
Sophie offers a view of God and an explanation of evil in Does God Exist? What is her view, and how can it be criticized?
You are now philosophers, and are ready to apply your critical, analytical skills to the following questions.
1. Exactly what is the problem of evil and why is it a challenge to the usual Judaic-Christian view? Consider the following attempts to answer the problem, and show the problems with these answers:
a) evil is a result of free will
b) earthly life is a testing ground
c) we need evil in order to be able to experience good
2. After Paley gives his argument he considers some possible objections. Here are three objections he considers:
a) "...that we had never seen a watch...(or) that we had never known an artist capable of making one" would not weaken the argument.
b) "Neither would it invalidate the conclusion that the watch sometimes went wrong."
c) A paraphrase: Nor would it weaken my argument to be told that there were principles of order built into the nature of matter. Playing the role of philosopher extraordinaire (perhaps modeled partly after Philo) point out the weaknesses in Paley's defense.
Analyze the following argument? What sort of argument is it? What principle is it based upon? How can it be criticized?
Imagine a hundred yard dash in which one of the two runners has his legs shackled together. He has progressed 10 yds., while the unshackled runner has gone 50 yds. How do they rectify the situation? Do they merely remove the shackles and allow the race to proceed? Then they could say that "equal opportunity" now prevailed. But one of the runners would still be forty yards ahead of te other. Would it not be the better part of justice to allow the previously shackled runner to make-up the forty yard gap; or to start the race all over again? That would be affirmative action towards equality. Lyndon Johnson (or perhaps, Bill Moyers, speech writer)
Spell out this argument in more detail. What sort of an argument is it, and what does it imply about affirmative action? Critically analyze it.
I. Circle the BEST answer to the following:
The author of the cosmological argument is:
a) Aquinas d) Hume
b) Jesus e) Paley
c) Doubting Thomas
Which of the following is NOT an assumption of the traditional problem of evil?
a) God is perfectly good
b) God is omnipotent
c) There is real evil
d) God created it all
A transcendent god is:
a) other and apart from the world d) equivalent with the universe
b) unknowable e) an analogical god
c) "inside" the human spirit
Who was president at the time of the Civil Rights Act of 1964?
a) Truman d) Johnson
b) Nixon e) Bush
c) Kennedy
Theodicy is:
a) theory of God and gods
b) a dialogue about religion
c) the name of an argument for God's existence
d) the name of a character in Hume's dialogue
e) the justification of evil
The analogical argument we studied is often called:
a) the teleological argument d) the pantheistic argument
b) Pascal's wager argument e) the anthropological argument
c) cosmological argument f) the Catholic argument
Paley considers a number of objections to his theory based on the watch. Which of the following does he NOT consider:
a) that the watch sometimes doesn't work
b) that we had never seen a watch
c) that there are natural laws which explain the watch
d) that the universe bears little resemblance to a watch
Problems of Philosophy Name________________________
Which character in Hume's Dialogues on Natural Religion thinks that any good argument for God must reach perfect certainty.
a) Demea d) Apriori
b) Polyclytus ) Philo
c) Cleanthes
The main point of Richard Dawkin's article is:
a) God is blind
b) that there must be an intelligent designer
c) that a continuous and cumulative "sieve" is all that is needed for an explanation
d) that survival of the fittest explains everything
e) there are genetic explanations for design
Which of the following reasons does Aquinas give for the premise: it is impossible to go on to infinity:
a) because to take away the cause is to take away the effect
b) because then there would be no first cause
c) because something cannot come from nothing
d) because God is the first cause
Cleanthes's arguments, in Hume's Dialogue can best be described as an"
a)atheistic
b)pantheistic
c)animistic
d)naturalistic
e)pessimistic
PROBLEMS OF PHILOSOPHY
Final Examination
Short Answer. Do 5 OF THE FOLLOWING: Be brief but clear. 3 pts each
1. State three criticisms of the cosmological argument.
2. State three criticisms Darrow makes of the teleological argument.
3. What is anthropomorphism in religion?
4. "An answer is always a form of death." What is the alternative according to Fowles, and what does he mean by it?
5. According to Mayo, what is the problem with the assertion that God only permits evil?
6. What are some of the possible meanings of design?
7. In one sentence, what is the basis of John Hospers hard determinism?
II. Essays ONE essay from each section: A, B, and C. (A total of three - 15 points each.)
A.1. James insists that there is chance in the universe; Fowles thinks that hazard plays an important part of human affairs. What do these terms mean and how, according to James and Fowles do they enhance or guarantee freedom?
2. The soft determinist or compatibilist believes that determinism is compatible with moral responsibility. What is the position and what is the argument for compatibility?
3. What is the problem of evil? What are some of the possible answers to the problem (remember Hick). Using the Mayo essay as a guide, what are the criticisms to Hicks attempted solution of the problem?
PROBLEMS OF PHILOSOPHY
Short Answer. Do 5 OF THE FOLLOWING: Be brief but clear. 3 pts each
. State three criticisms of Hick's major explanation of natural evil.
2. Some say that human free will is the reason for evil in the world. What are two objections to this view?
3. What is panentheism?
6. According to James, what does "chance" mean?
7. What is the major difference between self and character according to Campbell?
. Essays. ONE essay from each section: A, B, and C. (A total of three - 15 points each.)
A.1. Mill claims that you can change your character if you want to. How does this argument fit into the free will-determinism issue? Would Fowles agree? Which of the positions seems to best describe Fowles overall position?
2. The hard determinist claims that moral responsibility is incompatible with determinism; Schlick and other soft determinists claim that determinism is a necessary condition for holding someone morally responsible. Give their arguments in as much detail as possible.
3. The arguments for God's existence are attempted explanations. Exactly what are they trying to explain? Do they succeed or fail as explanations?
II. Essay
1. We have discussed some of the problems with respect to the conception of God and the meaning of religious language. Discuss different conceptions of God and the function that such conceptions have for people. Show how some of these conceptions compete with a scientific view of the world and discuss how other conceptions raise questions about the meaning of religious utterances.
2. Explain and criticize some of the possible explanations of evil given by Johnson and Hick?
THERE ARE A NUMBER OF EXAMS AND QUIZZES BELOW.
Problems of Philosophy Determinism and Free Will
Write legibly and clearly. It is nearly impossible to distinguish between unclear confused writing and unclear confused thoughts!
Short Answer: Be accurate, clear and precise. All should be able to be answered in one to two sentences (perhaps compond sentences!) DO 7 (seven) only; 3 points each.)
1 Campbell says that the first condition of a free act is that it is self caused. Is he, therefore, a determinist? Why or why not?
2. Distinguish fatalism and determinism.
3. In one sentence, what is the Oxford St. - Divinity St. example of James suppose to show. (Don't just name James' general position.)
4. What is the very short saying that Sartre uses at the beginning of his article to explain existentialism?
5. What is the main point that Hospers makes to give further support to hard determinism?
6. Give an example of what clearly seems to be a coercive offer.
7 What is the deterrence theory of punishment?
8 Why is the reform theory of punishment compatible with determinism (hard or soft)?
9. "I can change my desires, if I want to." Who would most likely say this, and to whom would they say it? (That is, in reply to what sort of criticism?)
II. Four points. In class and in the handout "Freedom and Determinism" I have argued that there are 3 components to the full analysis of "free" as defined by compatibilists-soft determinists. In the handout, the third component was in the section on FREE PERSONS. Sooo, give me the 3 key elements in the definition.
III. Essay question: Pick one of the positions and give me the argument or the story they would give about praising and blaming, moral responsibility and punishment and reward. Since, every position has some weak spots, tell me what the biggest difficulty of the position is, that is, give a criticism or two. Then answer that criticism. 15 points
Free Will and Determinism Problems of Philosophy
Write all answers in the blue book. I recommend reading the short answer questions first, but answer the essays first. They are worth more points.
I. Short Answer. DO FIVE. Be precise and to the point. Two points each. (10 POINTS TOTAL)
1. How do they teach self control in Walden II?
2. What are the sources of evidence for determinism, that is, why is determinism plausible.
3. Briefly describe the point that Lamont makes with respect to the Titanic.
4. What is the humanitarian theory of punishment which Lewis criticizes?
5. How would a soft determinist or compatibilist analyze the phrase "I could have acted otherwise?"
6. How would a Hard Determinist reply to Stace's conception of freedom?
II. Essays. DO TWO. Be complete and expansive. Elaborate! Tell all; in short give answers which are worth 15 points each.
You should make sure that your answers clearly reveal that you understand the basic concepts. (30 POINTS TOTAL)
1. Campbell presents a libertarian view built around a distinction between self and character. What makes this a libertarian view? Criticize the view; show how the view has difficulties on its own ground. (In other words, do not just give an alternative view, show a problem which the libertarian has to face.)
2. Are people free in Walden II? Should they be held morally responsible? First, discuss why the answer should be "Yes" then discuss the reasons why someone might say, "No."
3. You are a member of a jury where a woman is on trial for killing her husband. From the opening statements it is clear that the defense is going to be that the woman was a victim of abuse. There is no question that she actually did kill him, though her life was not directly threatened at the time she killed him. What sort of evidence, will the defense attorney have to show to convince you that she should be acquitted?
_____________________________________________
Free Will and Determinism
I. Short Answer. DO SIX. Be precise and to the point. (However do not answer any question with just "yes" or "no.") Four points each. (20 POINTS TOTAL)
1. "They are doing what they want to do, not what they are forced to do. That's the source of the tremendous power of positive reinforcement - there's no restraint and no revolt." - Frazier in Walden II Are the people in Walden II therefore free? Explain your answer.
2. Libertarians and hard determinists agree on one thing. What is it?
3. Campbell says that the first condition of a free act is that it is self caused. Is he, therefore, a determinist?
4. Why might Darrow be classified as a hard determinist?
5. How would a soft determinist or compatibilist analyze the phrase "I could have acted otherwise?"
6. Distinguish fatalism and determinism.
7. Describe a "borderline" case of freedom for soft determinism. Be sure to show why it is borderline.
II. Essays. DO ONE ONLY. Be complete and expansive. Elaborate! Tell all You should make sure that your answers clearly reveal that you understand the basic concepts. (20 POINTS TOTAL)
1. Write a dialogue, that is, a conversation between two people who advocate different positions on the issue of freedom. Your dialogue should bring out the key elements in the positions and the practical consequences of the two positions. Style, humor, cleverness in the use of examples are all welcomed, but be sure to cover the key points.
2. Evans has contended that the Rehabilitation Theory of Punishment is the one most consistent with soft determinism; the Retribution Theory is often defended by libertarians. Show the connections the theories of freedom and the the theories of punishment which would be held by these views. Which theory of punishment seems to you to be the best? Why? (Remember Stace briefly discusses punishment.)
____________________________________________________
A QUIZ - WITH ANSWERS.
Problems of Philosophy. Name_____________________________
True - False: Circle one. Comments are optional; you can get credit for a wrong answer with an intelligent and truthful comment! WITH ANSWERS
T F* Determinism is the theory that most events are caused.
Comment: FOR BOTH HARD AND SOFT DETERMINISM ALL EVENTS ARE CAUSE, NOT JUST SOME OR MOST.
T* F Stace believes that moral responsibility is consistent with determinism.
Comment: CONSISTENT WITH AND COMPATIBLE MEAN THE SAME THING
T F* Hard determininsts are fatalists.
Comment: I WENT TO SOME PAIN TO DISTINGUISH THE TWO. A DETERMINED EVENTS WILL HAPPEN IF NOTHING IS DONE TO PREVENT IT; A FATED EVENT WILL OCCUR NO MATTER WHAT.
T F* Stace believes in the retribution form of punishment.
Comment: Determinists usually believe in deterrence and/or reform. Punishment should be used to CHANGE people
T* F The hard determinist and the libertarian would define a free act of the will in the same way.
Comment: Surprised anyone would miss this. Both DEFINE or GIVE AS THE MEANING of free that they are uncaused, new beginnings etc
T* F Campbell says that the self must be the sole cause of a free act.
Comment: "Sole" means only, that is, there are no causes before the self chooses - so Campbell is an indeterminist
T* F Evans has argued that in principle all human behavior is predictable.
Comment: FOR DETERMINISTS ALL EVENTS ARE PREDICTABLE AND EXPLAINABLE IN PRINCIPLE OR IN THEORY. OF COURSE WE DON'T KNOW ALL THE FACTS SO WE CAN'T DO IT IN PRACTICE.
T F* Mill agrees that our desire to change ourselves is uncaused
Comment: MILL IS DETERMINIST - WE CAN CHANGE OURSELVES IF WE WANT TO AND OF COURSE SOMETHING WILL CAUSE US TO WANT TO.
T F* Hospers main point is to remind us that there are is a big difference in the freedom of normal people and abnormal people.
Comment: AT ONE POINT HE SAYS THAT SOME OF US ARE DOMINATED BY A MALEVOLENT UNCONSCIOUS AND SOME BY A BENEVOLENT ONE, BUT WE ARE ALL DOMINATED BY THE UNCONSCIOUS
T F* For Schlick, laws of nature make us do things.
Comment: LAWS OF NATURE OR SCIENTIFIC LAWS MERELY DESCRIBE HOW THINGS DO BEHAVE; THEY DO NOT MAKE ANYTHING HAPPEN
T F* James argument from regret is meant to show that there should be less guilt in a world of chance.
Comment: HE DOESN'T TALK ABOUT GUILT AND BESIDES HE IS BIG ON MORAL RESPONSIBILITY AND THEREFORE IN A WORLD OF CHANCE, AN INDETERMINIST WORLD THERE WILL BE MORE GUILT.
According to compatibilists determinism a free act is one which is not COERCED, COMPELLED, FORCED OR CONSTRAINED and is based on
ONE'S OWN WANTS AND DESIRES OR ONE'S OWN PSYCHOLOGICA STATES.
DISTINGUISH SELF AND CHARACTER
The character is formed by environment and education etc and, the self can rise above the charcter and make a decision. Nothing causes the decisions of the self, but it is the core of the person.
___________________________________________
Another Quiz:
Problems of Philosophy. Name_____________________________
True - False: Circle one.
If you think a question is ambiguous or unclear, answer it and then make a short comment clarifying why you think it is ambiguous or unclear.
T F* Determinism is the theory that most events are caused.
T F* Holbach says that people never choose.
(They do choose - the choices are caused.)
T F For Holbach, teaching morality is useless.
T F James argues that the fact that we regret past actions shows that determinism must be false.
t F The hard determinist and the libertarian would DEFINE a free act of the will in a similar way.
T F Buckle argues the achievement of great leaders in history shows that determinism is false.
T F Evans has argued that in principle all human behavior is predictable.
T F Russell says that the best way to enlarge the Self is through contemplation.
T F The syllabus indicates that the people who missed the quiz today can do a make up quiz.
T F James believes that chance shows that people have free will.
____________________________________________
YET ANOTHER EXAM
Free Will and Determinism and Knowledge and Truth
Problems of Philosophy
I. Short Answer. Be precise and to the point. Two sentences at most. Three points each.
1. What is the coherence theory of truth?
2. How does James use the Oxford St-Divinity St example to illustrate his point. That is, exactly what and how does it make his point?
3. How would a hard determinist define `free act?'
4. Suppose I say, "Bill Clinton is wearing boxer shorts today." Suppose it is true that he is indeed wearing boxer shorts today. Why or why wouldn't you say that I know that Bill Clinton is wearing boxer shorts today?
5. In class I used the example of a phonograph record to illustrate a theory of truth. Which theory did it illustrate and briefly indicate how.
II. Give an example of something you believe, something you know, and something you are certain of. Then carefully, using some of the material covered, show how these are different.
10 points
II. Essay. Do one of the following. 15 points each
1. State as clearly as you can what the theory of hard determinism is. What evidence supports this view? What are the important implications? If you can, give an argument against the view.
2. State as clearly as you can what James' theory is and what evidence he gives for his theory.
If you decisions occur by chance, do you think that he really save moral responsibility.
1. In defense of compatibilism Carolyn takes the view that one is free even if she is acting upon unconscious motives. Why does she take this view? How can it be criticised?
2. There is a long discussion about the empirical status of the doctrine of determinism. What is the issue all about? Why is it important? What are the alternative views?
3. Frederick believes that his free willist position is the only one which can give an adequate account of moral responsibility. Describe his view. Why does he say this? Why does Carolyn (compatibilism) disagree and what is her position on moral responsibility and determinism?