PHIL 437: FINAL EXAM REVIEW QUESTIONS

The Final Exam will be given in two parts: (1) In-Class. The first part will be a one-hour exam on Monday, Dec. 11 at 10:30 am in MGH 271. This part of the exam will cover Book 1, Part 4, Sections 6-7 and Books II and III of the Treatise. (2) Take-Home. The second part will be a take-home exam to be submitted via email by midnight on Wednesday, Dec. 13. This part of the exam will cover the entire Treatise. The topic for the take-home part of the exam will be given out in class on Thursday, Dec. 7.

Review questions for the in-class exam appear below. 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. The in-class exam will be a one-hour exam. To relieve the time pressure, I will allow an extra fifteen minutes 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. Your answers should show that you are familiar with Hume's position and with his own reasons for his position.

The in-class 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. According to Hume, could we have an idea of a self that is the same through time? Explain. According to Hume, what is our idea of self?

2. On Hume's account, could we have the idea of a ghost, if ghosts are understood to be invisible entities? Explain. Even if we could have the idea of a ghost, on Hume's account could we ever come to believe that ghosts cause objects to move? Explain.

3. How does Hume's Appendix modify his account of personal identity? What do you think is the inconsistency that he refers to in his account of the self? Explain.

4. What does Hume mean by a true skeptic? How does a true skeptic differ from a despairing skeptic?

5. What is the difference between the object and the sensation of a passion? What is the distinction between the subject of the cause and the quality of the cause of a passion? For pride and humility identify all four of the following: object, sensation, subject of the cause, quality of the cause?

6. Explain what Hume means when he says: "From this double relation of ideas and impressions the passion is deriv'd."(T2.1.5.5)

7. A logical puzzle about pride and humility. Hume claims that virtue makes us proud and vice makes us humble. But he also claims that humility is a virtue. This would imply that humility would make us proud. Hume also claims that pride is a vice. This would imply that pride would make us humble. Why are these implications troubling? How might Hume solve the puzzle?

8. What does Hume mean by necessity? Note that Hume gives two definitions. Explain why it does not matter to him which one we use.

9. “We feel that our actions are subject to our will on most occasions, and imagine we feel that the will itself is subject to nothing; because when by a denial of it we are provok’d to try, we feel that it moves easily every way, and produces an image of itself even on that side, on which it did not settle.” Explain the role of this quotation in Hume’s argument against freedom of the will.

13. "Since reason alone can never produce any action, or give rise to volition, I infer, that the same faculty is as incapable of preventing volition, or of disputing the preference with any passion or emotion."(T 2.3.3.4) Is this a correct inference? Couldn't reason judge that certain desires are irrational and thereby eliminate them? Critically evaluate Hume's position.

15. According to Hume, what are the only two senses in which a passion can be called unreasonable? Do you agree? Are there any others? Explain.

16. What does Hume mean by "what is vulgarly call'd his reason"(T 2.3.4.1)?

17. "Reason is the discovery of truth or falsehood. Truth or falsehood consists in an agreement or disagreement either to the real relations of ideas, or to real existence and matter of fact. Whatever, therefore, is not susceptible of this agreement or disagreement, is incapable of being true or false, and can never be an object of our reason."(T 3.1.1.9) Explain why, in this passage, Hume is talking about the understanding and not just reason in the sense in which he uses the term in Book 1. Why does Hume think that moral distinctions cannot be relations of ideas? Why does he think that they cannot be matters of fact?

18. The previous quotation continues: "Whatever therefore is not susceptible of this agreement or disagreement, is incapable of being true or false, and can never be an object of our reason. Now, it is evident our passions, volitions, and actions, are not susceptible of any such agreement or disagreement; being original facts and realities, complete in themselves, and implying no reference to other passions, volitions, and actions. It is impossible, therefore, they can be pronounced either true or false, and be either contrary or conformable to reason." Explain why this is a version of noncognitivism about the passions. How might someone use Hume's own discussion in Book 2 to challenge his noncognitivism about the passions?

19. "We do not infer a character to be virtuous, because it pleases; but in feeling that it pleases after such a particular manner, we in effect feel that it is virtuous."(T 3.1.2.3) Explain how, on Hume's account, the judgment that a character is virtuous is like the judgment that of cause and effect. Explain how they are different.

20. According to Hume, what are the four features that can make a character trait a moral virtue or moral vice (for both natural and artificial virtues and vices)? Would all four kinds of virtue generally be considered moral virtues? Consider each kind separately.

21. If Hume accepted that the moral virtues are all character traits that contribute to the general good, would Hume be a moral realist? Explain.

22. According to Hume, what is the only difference between the natural and the artificial virtues?

23. What is moral cognitivism? What is moral non-cognitivism? What does Hume mean by reason "correcting" the sentiments? What does Hume mean by "the general view of things"(T 3.3.1.23)? What role does it play in his account of morality? Does the general view of things or does Hume's discussion of "correcting" sentiments introduce an element of cognitivism into his account of morality?

24. Hume argues that the motive for justice cannot be explained by public or private benevolence? Why not? Why couldn't Hume explain the motive for justice this way: People have an innate desire for justice and this desire motivates them to perform just acts? According to Hume, what is the virtuous motive for just acts (e.g., repaying a debt)?

25. In the Republic, Glaucon argues that self-interest favors acting unjustly whenever we can get away with it? Would Hume agree? Critically evaluate both sides.

26. What does Hume mean by "external goods"? Why are they a problem for society? What is the main impediment to harmonious society? What is the role of judgment and understanding in solving the problem? According to Hume, the result is a system of restraints. What kind of restraints? Hume insists: "Nor is such a restraint contrary to the passions."(T 3.2.2.9) Why does he insist on this? Is he correct? He is surely correct that for the restraints of justice to be effective, they have to be supported by a source of motivation. The question is whether the understanding can provide motivation to comply with the restraints of justice or whether the restraints must be supported by blind passions. How would an opponent of Hume best argue that the understanding can provide the motivation to comply with the constraints of justice? Critically evaluate Hume and his opponents on this question.

27. Why does Hume think that justice does not depend on promises? What examples does Hume use to illustrate how conventions can arise without promises? In what ways are they analogous to moral decisions involving justice? Are there important disanalogies? Explain.

28. What is the point of Hume's example of the surgeon and the robber (T 3.2.5.15)? Do you agree with Hume on the example? How might someone disagree with Hume on the significance of the example?

29. What are the three laws on which the peace and security of human society depends?

30. According to Hume, what is the origin of civil government? What are the advantages of government?

31. Aristotle distinguished between natural virtue and virtue in the strict sense by saying that natural virtue is blind but virtue in the strict sense is guided by reason. How might Hume distinguish between natural virtue and virtue in the strict sense? What would Hume substitute for the role of reason in Aristotle's account? Critically evaluate both positions.

---