美国印第安纳大学麦肯尼法学院哲学方面的课程作业题目-Final Exam Topics

美国印第安纳大学麦肯尼法学院哲学方面的课程essay题目-Final Exam Topics

 

1.  According to Descartes, the objects that we are aware of in sensory experience  (things like tables and trees) are mind-independent physical things.  Berkeley claims that an object is “nothing but a congeries of sensible impressions, or ideas perceived by various senses”, and Kant says that the objects we are aware of in experience are just “appearances,” not “things in themselves”.  Explain these views.  How are they similar and how are they different?  Which of these three philosophers offers the most convincing defense of his view?  Justify your assessment with particular reference to the strengths and weaknesses of each.根据笛卡尔，我们感官的体验感知的对象（如表和树）是独立于心灵的物质的东西。伯克利声称是一个对象”只不过是一堆感觉印象，或思想的各种感官知觉，康德说，我们的经验是认识的对象是“表现，”而不是“自己”的东西。解释这些意见。他们是如何相似，他们有什么不同？这三位哲学家的观点提供了最有说服力的辩护？证明你有各自的长处和弱点评估特别参考。

 

2.  How might Plato attempt to establish that the mind (soul) can exist independently of the body?  Could he provide a convincing argument for this claim?  Explain why or why not, with attention to specific details of his arguments.  How does Descartes attempt to establish the same claim?  Is his argument more successful?  Why or why not?

 

3.  In the “First Meditation,” Descartes tries to raise a problem about our ability to know anything about what is going on outside of our own minds.  Here are three possible responses you might have.  (1)  He raised a serious problem, and no one has satisfactorily answered it.  (2) He raised a serious problem – he gave us real reasons for doubt – but then this problem was subsequently satisfactorily addressed (maybe by Descartes himself or maybe by some other philosopher).  (3)  He didn’t even raise a real problem; his appeal to dreams and to evil demons doesn’t give us any reason at all to doubt that there is a world outside of our minds about which we know a great deal.  Which of these options do you think is correct?  Explain and defend your view, making use (as relevant) of the views of any of the philosophers we have discussed.在“第一次冥想，“笛卡尔尝试提出一个关于我们知道是怎么回事，我们自己的心智能力以外的任何问题。这里有三个可能的反应，你可能会有。（1）他提出了一个严重的问题，并没有一个令人满意的回答。（2）他提出了一个严重的问题–他给了我们的真正原因，但怀疑–然后这个问题被满意的解决（也许笛卡尔自己或者其他一些哲学家）。（3）他甚至没有提高的一个现实问题；他到梦和邪恶的恶魔并没有给我们任何理由去怀疑有我们的思想，我们知道了很多外面的世界。这些选项做你认为是正确的吗？解释和捍卫你的观点，利用（相关的）的任何我们所讨论的哲学家的观点。#p#分页标题#e#

 

4.  Explain Kant's views about the possibility and limits of synthetic a priori knowledge.  In your essay, take account of the following questions.  What is synthetic a priori knowledge?  Why is Kant so concerned about how it is possible for us to have knowledge of this kind?  What sorts of things, according to Kant, can we have synthetic  a priori knowledge about?  How can we have this knowledge?  What are the limits of our synthetic a priori knowledge?  How does Kant establish those limits?  What are the consequences of his view for the projects of philosophers like Descartes and Plato?

 

5.  Does Schlick’sverificationism provide a successful response to debates about the existence of a world of objects outside of our minds?  Explain why or why not.  (In your essay, be sure to explain Schlick'sverificationist theory of meaning and how he uses it to respond to debates about the external world.)

 

6.  Write a dialogue between Schlick and Plato about Plato's attempt to prove the immortality of the soul.  How might Schlick respond to Plato's project?  What reasons might he offer in defense of his response?  What could Plato say in reply to Schlick, and on what grounds could he defend his reply?  (In thinking about this issue, you might consider whether Plato’s Theory of Forms or his Theory of Recollection could be of any help to him in responding to Schlick.)  Be sure that your dialogue ends in a way that clarifies the ultimate point or points of disagreement between Schlick and Plato.

 

7.  Berkeley denies a realist view of perception:  he denies that we are ever directly aware of mind-independent objects through the senses, and then he even denies that our sensory ideas so much as represent mind-independent objects.  Does Berkeley succeed in defeating these realist views?  Explain why or why not, with particular attention to the details of his arguments.

 

8.  One day you receive the following letter:

Dear Sir or Madam:

I am in the process of putting together a must-read list of great philosophers.  Some of the works that have been recommended to me are Plato’s Phaedo, Descartes’ Meditations, Berkeley’s Three Dialogues, Kant’s Prolegomena, and Schlick’s “Positivism and Realism.” I understand that you have recently studied these works in depth, and I would value your opinion.  Please choose one of these works and tell me whether you think its philosophical content justifies putting it on my list.  Explain five reasons why it should or shouldn’t, discussing particular details of the text.  Here are some questions you might consider.  Was it an important philosophical work? Was the view it put forward particularly interesting or distinctive, and in what ways?  Were its arguments compelling? What is its relation to other philosophical works you have read?  What personal impact did it have on you?  Would you recommend it to other people interested in exploring philosophy?  Why or why not?  I would especially appreciate if you could explain what particular aspects of the work are the basis for your assessment.  (Please focus on philosophical content and ignore difficulties you had with the philosopher’s writing style or language.  I already know that philosophical works aren’t easy to read!)  All information you can give me would be much appreciated!#p#分页标题#e#

Thank you for your time and help.

Sincerely yours,

Phil O. Sopher

Write a letter to Phil in which you fully answer his questions.