Learning Goal: I’m working on a philosophy multi-part question and need the explanation and answer to help me learn.
UNIT 4
- Consider the example of touching a hot plate and pulling your hand back without even thinking about it. Would d’Holbach describe this as a free action? Why or why not?
- Consider the desire to marry and have children. Is this a free choice or something that we are caused to do or driven to do? Discuss at least two philosophers from Unit 4 in your answer.
- Describe Baron d’Holbach’s views on determinism. Be sure to identify his position on determinism versus free will.
- Soft determinists or compatibilists make a distinction between actions that have internal and external causes. Give an example of each kind of cause, and discuss at least two philosophers from Unit 4 in your answer.
- Libertarians like Richard Taylor describe us as having free will, at least in certain situations or with certain conditions. What would be the necessary conditions for us to know we are acting freely?
UNIT 5
- Characterize Plato’s story of the Ring of Gyges. What is it meant to illustrate? What are Socrates’ arguments for why one should be good, even if no one else witnesses it? Directly quote Socrates’ words and interpret and explain them in your answer.
- Explain Aristotle’s Doctrine of the Golden Mean and how it relates to virtue. To do this well, be sure to define virtue in your response, according to Aristotle’s text. Why, according to Aristotle, is the mean of virtue relative to the individual and the situation?
- Quote and explain both formulations of Kant’s Categorical Imperative from his essay. Provide an example of an action that you feel would pass the first formulation, but would fail the second. Clearly explain what the action is and how exactly it does so, on both accounts.
- What is Mill’s “Greatest Happiness Principle�? How would we use his principle to decide which actions are right or wrong? How does his definition of happiness lead to a criticism that he is a hedonist? Why would hedonism be perceived as an obstacle to ethics?
UNIT 6
- Discuss and compare some of the solutions that philosophers have offered for the problem of evil. What do you believe is the most convincing way to make the existence of an all-powerful God compatible with the existence of evil in the world?
- Sartre famously says, “Existence precedes essence.� What does this mean? Explain how he uses the example of a paper cutter to help illustrate his point. What does this then require of human beings? Demonstrate that you have the right answers to these questions by directly quoting from Sartre’s essay.
- What is Pascal’s wager? What sort of argument does Pascal give for believing in God? Is this the “right� sort of reason to believe in God, or are there better reasons to hold such a belief? How might William James or W.K. Clifford respond to his argument? What arguments does James or Clifford make about the evidence needed to hold a belief? From their perspectives, does Pascal provide a rational reason for belief in God? .Develop an argument to defend your position on Pascal’s wager, using specific arguments and ideas from James and Clifford to support your position.
- Carefully explain and analyze the ontological argument of Anselm. What criticisms have Gaunilo and others brought to bear against this argument? Is Anselm’s argument convincing? If so, why? If not, why not?
- Discuss Aquinas’s cosmological arguments and his teleological argument for the existence of God. Carefully explain and compare and contrast the five arguments. What criticisms can be brought to bear on these arguments? Which do you think is the strongest and why?