PHIL 450: Study Questions for Week #1 (Introduction)
1. Explain or distinguish the following terms. You may use examples to do so:
(a) Epistemic Principle/Particular Epistemic Judgment.
(b) Top-Down vs. Bottom-Up Reasoning in Epistemology
(c) Proof Paradigm/Equilibrium Reasoning in Epistemology
2. (a) What is the complete analysis of knowledge that Theaetetus proposes to Socrates? State it in the form of a mutual implication ('ó'). (b) Your answer to (a) is itself equivalent to two claims of implication. What are they? (c) Socrates proposes a counterexample to one of the two claims of implication. Which one? (d) What is Socrates' counterexample? Explain why it is a counterexample. (e) Which claim of implication does Socrates not propose a counterexample to? (f) Logically, what would be required for there to be a counterexample to the answer to part (e)? Is there a counterexample to the answer to part (e)? (Use as your test for a counterexample the considered judgment of a majority of the class. If you think there is a counterexample, give one that a majority of the class would accept. If you think there is no counterexample, give the best potential counterexample you can and explain why a majority of the class would not accept it.)