Fundamentals of Philosophy

Fundamentals of Philosophy

Multiple Choice: Answer all of the following. Circle the best answer.

1. In both lecture and the textbook, it is assumed that the statement `X knows A` means that:
   1. X knows A is true with absolute (100%) certainty.
   2. X knows A beyond all reasonable doubt.
   3. X can never know anything.
   4. Both “a” and “b.”

Fallacy Identification: For each of the following arguments, identify which fallacy is committed from is as follows: genetic fallacy, composition, division, ad hominem (appeal to the person), equivocation, appeal to popularity, appeal to tradition, appeal to tradition, appeal to ignorance, straw man, begging the question, false dilemma, slippery slope, hasty generalization, or faulty analogy.

1. Abortion rights must be protected. If abortion rights are limited, then this will lead to even more limits on a woman’s right to self-determination. Before you know it, women will lose the right to even enter the workplace or drive a car.
2. Beth says that she is a psychic, and I believe her. No one has ever proven that it is impossible for her to have psychic powers.
3. Nick claims that, morally, we ought to adopt a vegan diet. However, I know for a fact that he sometimes eats cheese pizza when he has been drinking. Therefore, a vegan diet is too demanding for human beings to live by.
4. Defenders of criminal justice reform argue that our sentencing guidelines are too harsh. That is absurd. If we do not do something to deter people from engaging in anti-social behavior, then criminals will be free to rape and murder without having to fear any kind of punishment.

Short Answer: Answer the following, be clear and concise.

1. What is an argument? Give an example of an argument. Is your example a deductive argument or an inductive argument? Why?
2. What is confirmation bias? Describe an example of confirmation bias from the video we watched in class.
3. What is the impartial view for journalists? According to Greenwald, what is problematic about such an approach?
4. What is relativism? Why is relativism about (all) truth self-defeating? What is the difference between tolerance for other cultures and moral relativism?

Multiple choice: Answer all of the following. Circle the best answer.

1. Suppose that X is morally permissible. This means that:
   1. If you fail to do X, then your act is morally wrong.
   2. X is not morally obligatory, but you should be praised for doing X.
   3. If you do X, then your act was not wrong.
   4. Both “b” and “c.”

2. Suppose an opinion poll finds that 60% of participants believe that apples taste better than oranges. If the margin of error for the opinion poll was 3%, this tells us that:
   1. There is a 3% chance that the opinion poll is accurate.
   2. There is a 3% chance that the opinion poll is not
   3. Then number of people who think that apples taste better than oranges falls somewhere in the range of 57-63%.

3. If explanation X is an eligible explanation for event Y, this means that:
   1. X is internally consistent.
   2. X is externally consistent.
   3. X is a more adequate explanation (in terms of the 5 criteria) for Y than other explanations.
   4. Both “a” and “b.”

4. If theory T is falsifiable, this means that:
   1. There are ways (i.e., experiments, counterevidence, etc.) to disprove T.
   2. Scientists have demonstrated that T is false.
   3. T is an ad hoc
   4. All of the above.

Name the Argument: For each of the following, name the type of argument that corresponds to the form described. Give a strong example of this type of inductive argument.

1. A has properties X, Y, Z, and also M. B also has properties X, Y, and Z. Therefore, B probably has property M.
2. X% of the observed members of group A have property P. Therefore, a similar percentage of all members of group A probably have property P.

Short Answer: Answer the following, be clear and concise.

1. What is the deterrence argument for the death penalty? Describe one objection to this argument. What is the retributivist argument? Is it a consequentialist argument or a deontological argument? Justify your answer.
2. Describe the 5 criteria for testing a theory’s adequacy.
3. Suppose Bear claims that most people in Gotham would support spending local tax dollars on a new football stadium. To support his claim, Bear offers the following argument:

I asked about 20defferent Gotham residents at a recent home game if they would support using our local tax dollars to pay for a new football stadium, and the vast majority of them answered “yes.” Therefore, it is likely that most Gotham residents support using tax dollars to pay for a new stadium.

What type of inductive argument is this? Is it a strong argument? If so, why? If not, what is wrong with it?

4. Briefly describe the trolley problem. Why do some deontologists argue that it is wrong to pull the lever? Briefly describe the “enormous guy” variant of the trolly problem. Why do some deontologists argue that it is wrong to push the guy even if it is permissible to pull the lever?
5. Describe Mill’s four methods for testing causes.

Propositional Logic:

1. Symbols:
2. What does ~p mean in English? Provide a truth table definition for ~p
3. What does p ∙ q mean in English? Provide a truth table definition for p ∙ q
4. What does p v q mean in English? Provide a truth table definition for p v q
5. What does p →q mean in English? Provide a truth table definition for p → q

For the following, translate each sentence into symbolic form (i.e. propositional logic form) Clearly identify the relevant variables

5. Stephanie will go to the movies with her friends if she finishes her logic homework in time.
6. It is not the case that both Bear and Wolf like pizza.
7. The natural environment will become unsuitable for living creatures unless we drastically change our way of life.
8. Sally likes to read classic literature, or she likes both reality TV shows and listening to mindless pop divas.
9. Truth Tables. Test the following arguments for validity using the truth table method. If the argument is invalid, be sure to circle the relevant part(s) on the truth table

9. b → c

(2) a v b

(3) ~a

/ c

10. (1) p → q

(2) p v r

/ q

Proofs

11. (1) S → T

(2) ~T ∙ O / ~S

12. (1) A → B

(2) B → C / ~A v C

13. (1) ~P

(2) ~Q / ~ (P v Q)

14. (1) ~D

(2) D v E

(3) E → F / F

Categorical Logic

1. Categorical Statements:

15. What is the A statement (universal affirmative)? Represent it with a Venn diagram

16. What is the E statement (universal negative)? Represent it with a Venn diagram

17. What is the I statement (particular affirmative)? Represent it with a Venn diagram

18. What is the O statement (particular negative)? Represent it with a Venn diagram

1. For the following, translate each sentence into standard categorical form

19. Every politician is dishonest.
20. Most products described in infomercials are not to be trusted.
21. Only if a cat is furry is it cute.
22. Iron Maiden is a great band.

1. Categorical Syllogisms. Test the following categorical syllogisms for validity using the Venn diagram method

23. (1) All apes are mammals.

(2) No mammals are snakes.

/ No snakes are apes.

24. (1) All wizards are magical creatures.

(2) Some owls are magical creatures.

/ Some owls are wizards.