NOTE: I DID NOT INCLUDE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE
FIRST HALF OF THE COURSE. I SHOULD
CONSIDER WHETHER I NEED TO.
PHIL 350: FINAL
EXAM REVIEW QUESTIONS
The
final exam will take place in SAV 343 at 2:30 pm on Fri., Dec. 15. PLEASE BRING ONE OR MORE BLANK EXAM BOOKS AND
A PEN TO THE EXAM. EXAM BOOKS WITH NOTES
WRITTEN ON THEM OR WITH PAGES MISSING WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED. To relieve the time pressure, I will allow an
extra half-hour at the end of the exam.
Please answer all questions completely, but concisely. Answer in complete sentences. In preparing for the exam, you are encouraged
to discuss these questions with other members of the class, and to discuss what
the relevant considerations would be in answering them. However, each student is expected to develop
his/her own answers to the questions.
You should not discuss the wording of an answer or attempt to come up
with an agreed upon answer. If you draft
answers to the questions, you should not show your draft answers to others, nor
should you read or copy someone else's draft answers.
The final exams exam will be available
for pick-up in the Philosophy Department Office, Savery 345, during the
first week of winter quarter. If you
would like your exam mailed to you, please provide me with a sufficiently
large, stamped, self-addressed envelope.
1. Explain the
following distinctions as they are used in this course (you may use examples):
(a) internalism/externalism
with respect to epistemic justification
(b) separable/non-separable
sources of beliefs
(c) linear/non-linear model
of justification
(d) habit memory/episodic
memory/factual memory
(e) reliabilism/virtue
reliabilism/virtue perspectivism
(f) knowledge/justification
skepticism
(g) global/local skepticism
(h) methodological/substantive
skepticism
2. What is
internalism with respect to justification?
If internalism is true, do animals and children have justified
beliefs? Explain.
3. If internalism with
respect to justification is true, do normal human beings have justified beliefs
about the past or future of justified beliefs about the external world)? Explain.
What about epistemology students and epistemology professors? Explain.
4. What is
reliabilism? Explain the following
problems for reliabilism: (a) the Evil
Genius; (b) Mr. Truetemp; (c) the generality problem.
5. Pojman claims
that his belief that he had cereal with banana for breakfast is a basic belief
for him. What does it mean to say that
the belief is basic? Would BonJour agree
that Pojman's belief about what he had for breakfast is basic? Explain.
What would BonJour identify as the basic belief that supports Pojman's
belief about what he had for breakfast?
Which position on memory beliefs is more plausible, Pojman or
BonJour's? Explain.
6. What is the
argument from analogy for other minds?
What are the problems for it?
7. What is logical
behaviorism? What is the logical
behaviorist solution to the problem of other minds? What are the problems for it?
8. What is the
inference-to-the-best-explanation solution to the problem of other minds? What are the problems for it?
9. What is the
evolutionary solution to the problem of other minds? Why is it an externalist account? What are the problems for it?
10. Is testimony a
non-separable source of belief for you?
Explain.
11. What is
psychologism in epistemology? BonJour
identifies three roles for psychology in epistemology that are
unobjectionable. He refers to them as minimal psychologism, conceptual psychologism, and the meliorative epistemological project. Explain each.
Why would BonJour regard the use of psychology to reply to a skeptic as
question-begging? How might the
naturalistic epistemologist reply to this objection?
12. What is the
metaphor of Neurath's raft? Why does it
apply to Quine's epistemology? Is Quine
a coherentist about justification?
13. Quine regards
skepticism as "an offshoot of science"? What does he mean by this?
14. BonJour argues
that naturalized epistemology can say nothing to distinguish science from
occult beliefs such as astrology. Is
this true? How would Quine reply?
15. BonJour claims
that if naturalized epistemology includes arguments for its positions, it is
self-referentially inconsistent. What
does this mean? Why does BonJour think
that it is true? How would the
naturalized epistemologist reply?
16. According to a
virtue reliabilist, what are the intellectual virtues? Give a definition and then illustrate it with
two examples and explain why they are intellectual virtues. Can those without intellectual virtues still
have justified perceptual and memory beliefs?
Explain.
18. What are the
Principles of Cartesian Epistemology?
19. What is the
problem of the criterion? What are the
two ways of solving the problem?
20. Explain each
of the following responses to justification skepticism concerning our beliefs
about the external world and for each one, explain why BonJour finds it
unsatisfactory:
(a) Descartes's Response
(b) The Particularist's
Response
(c) The Contextualist's
Response
(d) The Coherentist's
Response
(e) The Reliabilist-Externalist's
Response
(f) The Naturalist's Response
(g) The Pragmatist's Response
(h) Rorty's Response
(i) Your Response (either
explain why Bonjour would find it unsatisfactory or explain why he would not).
21. What is the
crucial presumption about justification that BonJour shares with the skeptic?
What are the three kinds of
justification skepticism that anyone who accepts the crucial presumption,
including BonJour, must surrender to? Explain
why each one is unanswerable.
22. What is
BonJour's Anti-Skeptical Project? If
BonJour's Anti-Skeptical Project succeeds will it satisfy a global
justification skeptic? Explain. If the Anti-Skeptical Project fails, is that
the end of epistemology? Explain. Whatever answer you give to this question,
make sure you consider and reply to the strongest objection to your
answer.
23. What reasons
does Talbott offer for giving up the crucial presumption about justification
that BonJour shares with the skeptic? What
kind of reasons are they? BonJour would
see them as question-begging. Why? Are they question-begging? Explain.
24. In the terms
used in this course, how would you classify your epistemological view? Explain your view and your reasons for
holding it.