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.