HU2700 Final Examination Fall, 2004
_________________________________________________________________
Part A: For each of the following terms and names, give a precise definition, description, explanation, or identification as appropriate. Give enough information to show that you clearly understand and/or recognize each item. Do not go into a discussion of related issues. E.g., if the item refers to a particular theory or argument, do not discuss its pros and cons. Be specific. Include essential information, but do not include peripheral material. (4 points each)
1.
act utilitarianism
2.
correspondence theory of truth
3.
dualism
4.
empiricism
5.
epistemology
6.
ethical relativism
7.
idealism
8.
intrinsic value
9.
theory of moral obligation
10.
inductive argument
_________________________________________________________________________
Part B: Answer 5 of the following discussion questions. Indicate clearly which questions you are answering. Be sure to answer all parts of the question. Make your answers concise and complete. Avoid irrelevant discussion. Say exactly what you mean. Do not expect the grader to read your mind. (12 points each)
1.
For each of the following deductive arguments, classify the argument as (a) valid or invalid and as (b) sound or unsound . If you believe that you do not have enough information to perform a classification, explain why and say what additional information is needed. Justify all of your answers. Be specific .
(1) Some Michigan Tech students take (2) If George W. Bush won the
philosophy courses. 2004 presidential election,
Professor Lockhart is a MTU student. then he will be inaugurated
Therefore, Professor Lockhart takes in 2005
philosophy courses. George W. Bush will be
inaugurated in 2005.
Therefore, George W. Bush won
the 2004 presidential election.
2.
In Saint Anselm's Ontological Argument for the existence of God, what are God's essential (i.e., defining) characteristics? According to Anselm, what is the difference between "existence in the understanding" and "existence in reality"?
What is the free will defense ? What precisely does it defend? How is it supposed to work? Be specific.
3.
Compare and contrast Hume's and Kant's views on causality. According to Hume, what is the source of our beliefs in causality? What does Kant say is the source of those beliefs? Do we really know that some things (events) cause other things
(events), according to Hume and Kant? Explain. Be specific .

4.
What is materialism? Precisely state what you believe to be the strongest argument for materialism. Precisely state what you believe to be the strongest argument against materialism.
5.
Precisely state what you believe to be the strongest argument against ethical absolutism. Precisely state what you believe to be the strongest argument against ethical relativism.
6.
What exactly is act utilitarianism? Under what circumstances would an action be morally right according to an act utilitarian theory of obligation? Precisely state what you believe to be the strongest argument against act utilitarianism. Be specific .
7.
What are the main differences between the two formulations of Kant’s categorical imperative? Does Kant believe that the two formulations produce the same results when applied to specific ethical decisions? What does Kant mean by “maxim,”
“universal law,” “treating someone merely as a means,” and “treating someone as an end (in himself/herself)”?
Be specific .
8.
Are there ways in which the study of philosophy can be useful in everyday life? If so, give an example of such a situation. If not, explain why not. Be specific.