Term
|
Definition
| the philosophical investigation of the nature, constitution, and structure of reality meaning of life, free will, nature of mind |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| the study of the nature of knowledge and justification Seeks to establish a framework that we can use to construct genuine and accurate understanding. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
(Epistemology)
belief that genuine knowledge can never be achieved and it is futile to try |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
(Epistemology)
knowledge is possible, achievable through the faculty of reason, a priori knowledge is the basis, incl. logic, mathematics |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
(Epistemology)
knowledge is achievable through experience and the senses (observation), a posteriori knowledge emphasized |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
(Epistemology)
knowledge is the result of the combination of our reasoning abilities and experience (incl. experimentation and analysis) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Took a rational approach to finding what is real and true.
Constructive skepticism
Tear down the bricks of my previous house of knowledge, start building again from the foundation
What if everything I have been taught in my life has been inaccurate and unreliable?
Our senses are incomplete, subjective, and inaccurate
What then can we rely upon to know what is real? |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
What if there were an evil genius who worked to deceive my senses?
Reality then may be nothing like I perceive |
|
|
Term
| Reason as the basis of knowledge |
|
Definition
If I cannot rely on my senses, then I must turn to reason/ my rational capacity
I am a thing that “doubts, understands, conceives, affirms, denies, wills, and feels” |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Wax - melted and unmelted state: different perceptions
Is it the same substance, even though my perceptions of it differ radically?
My senses say No, but reason tells me Yes |
|
|
Term
| Cartesian Epistemology & Metaphysics |
|
Definition
To truly know reality, we must approach it through reason, and start from a position of skepticism (but not remain there)
Material things, our bodies and senses exist, & physical laws exist
Results in Dualism, both material and non-material things exist in the world |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Many people believe that we have both material and non-material aspects of reality
He initiated the goal of a unified theory of reality or Theory of Everything |
|
|
Term
| Concerns with Descartes M&E |
|
Definition
Mind-body problem
Has he really been able to doubt all of his assumptions?
Is his response satisfying?
What if there is no God? Or what if someone does not believe in God (or the type Descartes accepts).
What if someone does not have an active conscious thinking part e.g. comatose, severe dementia, pre-rational person? |
|
|
Term
| Major British Empiricists |
|
Definition
| John Locke, George Berkeley, and David Hume |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| personal interpretation (hyper-subjective), dismissal of real “truth” or “knowledge” |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
a priori, necessary truths, highest degree of certainty
Logic, mathematics, tautologies (statements true by definition)
E.g. disjunctive arguments, hypothetical arguments, geometry |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
a posteriori, contingent or particular truths, lower degree of certainty, based in part on probabilities
Analysis, prediction (cause and effect relationships), drawing connections from the natural world, generalizations
E.g. causal arguments, inferences, science |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Disagrees with the rationalists that we have innate knowledge
Does not agree with rationalists that we can achieve true knowledge independent of sense experience
Our mind at birth is a blank slate/ tabula rasa, that becomes full of knowledge only through experience |
|
|
Term
| Causal theory of Perception |
|
Definition
(Locke) Based on a Newtonian view of a mechanistic universe
Requires four distinct elements in the knowing process
The real object in the world
Experience of the object
Sensation of it in our mind, thoughts
Reflection of the ideas of the mind |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| (Locke)the properties of objects that reside in the objects independent of our perceptions of the object. Includes qualities that can be measured: size, shape, and weight |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| (Locke) properties that do not reside within the objects themselves, but instead are the power of objects to produce sensations in our mind. Includes color, smell, texture, and taste |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Took Locke’s argument of sense data to its natural conclusion
Rejects Locke’s belief that external objects exist
Because all we have are bundles of sense data, there is no reality other than that which is perceived
“To be is to be perceived” / esse est percipi
No primary qualities, all qualities are like Locke’s idea of secondary qualities
The only things that exist in the universe are minds and ideas that exist in minds
If the tree falls in the forest and there is no one there to hold such idea in their mind, then it really did not fall at all (because there is no tree if it is not perceived) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
A philosophical skeptic, doubt first then find answers primarily through empirical evidence
Outraged that while so many arguments depend on the existence of a certain type of God, there is no empirical or rational evidence for such a being
As a result, we have no good reason to believe in an external world or the laws of science
Perceptions are of two types: Impressions, ideas
we can always tell them apart |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
(Hume)
– experienced directly through the senses or emotions that are directly felt; lively and vivid |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
(Hume)
– product of our memory or imagination, not directly felt, but still perceived; lack liveliness and vividness |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
All human knowledge divided into 2 categories:
Relations of Ideas– discoverable by mere operation of thought, does not depend on existence elsewhere in universe, contradictions impossible (like deductive truth)
Matters of Fact – based on experience, contradictions are possible (like inductive truth) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
(Hume)
We base our decisions about the future on what happened in the past
We see an event followed always by another event and assume we have seen the first cause the effect of the second
We cannot perceive cause and effect, only event A followed by event B
There is no necessity that event A leads to event B, much less that it is the (only) cause |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
both the rationalists and empiricists are wrong in their approaches
Rationalists do not fully appreciate importance of sensory input
Empiricists do not sufficiently take reason into account |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
(Kant)
Both reason and sense are required to know
truths about the world are both necessary and universal
Instead of trying to connect distinct mind to distinct world, considers mind and world already integrated
The human mind constructs a knowable world |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
(Kant)
Unlike Empiricists, who view that mind is a passive receptor for senses
We don’t merely receive and record impressions, we actively select, organize, order, structure, and interpret them
Science does this through posing questions, hypotheses, constructing experiments and analyzing data
Invent concepts to explain new phenomena |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
(Kant)
Through the active use of the human mind and interactions with data of experience, we discover and construct knowledge of the world
We have limitations on our senses, range and quantity
We select only a small amount that gets our full attn.
Organize the sensations into a pattern
Interpret what the design or pattern means to us |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
(Kant)
The faculties of mind work with data from sense experience, constituting an orderly and intelligible world – my world
Not only do we have a priori knowledge – necessary and universal
Kant extends the idea to become synthetic a priori knowledge
Necessary and true, a priori, AND synthetic in the sense that it provides us with genuine info regarding our experience of the world
Kant outlines several categories of synthetic a priori knowledge
Cause and effect
Induction, Objects
Space and Time |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
(Kant)
Universally present in every person of normal cognitive function
BUT not objectively existent outside of the human mind (e.g. dolphin, ant, view from nowhere)
There is a real, objective world
But we do not have empirical access to it
We cannot know a “thing-in-itself”
We human beings do not have an all encompassing objective view |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
(Kant)
the world as we constitute it and experience it |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
(Kant)
the world beyond our perceptions, reality “in-itself” |
|
|
Term
| super transcendental ideas |
|
Definition
Self
Cosmos
God
They are regulative ideas that help us constitute our epistemological framework, but they can never be empirically verified |
|
|
Term
| Alison Jagger: Feminist Epistemology |
|
Definition
The thinkers who dominated mainstream philosophy shared certain limited assumptions
Western tradition has omitted the realm of emotions from considerations of knowledge and reason
Jagger believes this has been problematic by leading us to an incomplete understanding of knowledge |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
for the individual, case by case, personal choice (not coerced or part of a system), may affect other people
E.g. cheating, stealing
Our personal choices and acts that affect others privately pertain to personal ethics |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
applied to society generally, collective decision, part of a system
E.g. justice, treatment of a group of people (children, poor, mentally ill, etc…), resource distribution |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Actions – deciding right and wrong, good and bad based on individual action
Consequences – evaluating the morality based on the outcome of an action
Intentions – determining the morality based on the intentions/goals of the actors
Character – evaluating the morality of a person or collective based on their striving, actions, and intentions over an extended period of time |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
The view that the ultimate moral authority is the individual or the subject
What is morally permissible for me, may not be for you b/c you have decided it isn’t. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
The view that cultural norms determine what is ethically right and wrong
Extending the Ethical Subjectivism to a group of people who share a culture
Tries to be tolerant of varied customs and norms in different cultures
Makes interacting with other cultures challenging
Not clear how issues are resolved when a minority of the culture disagrees with the norm
Does not permit moral progress
Cannot evaluate other culture’s morality (place or time) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
the view that at least some moral values are universal and apply to all individuals and cultures
Rejects both theories of ethical relativism (ethical subjectivism and cultural relativism)
What is morally good/right does not depend on an individual or cultural acceptance of it (in many cases)
What is morally good/right is always morally good/right regardless of how it is perceived
Ethical absolutism is a general category
Many ethical theories are ethical absolutist |
|
|
Term
| Benefits of Ethical Absolutism |
|
Definition
Moral progress is possible
We can evaluate actions, moral principles and norms from other cultures, and time periods
We may be able to learn or discover ethical truths
Ethics is stable and not dynamic
It may be possible to achieve universal agreement re: the ethical truths and moral norms that follow potentially decreasing conflict
BUT that isn’t the situation now, so there are many conflicting beliefs about the absolute ethical truths |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
the view that we act morally when we pursue our own self interest
The highest moral value for all humans is to pursue their own happiness and well being (enlightened self-interest)
We can be good to others, but when goals conflict, favor our own, do not be altruistic
Type of ethical absolutist theory b/c it applies to all people
Not same as egotist – a person who is arrogant, boastful, and obsessed w/self |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
ring that makes you invisible
Part of Plato’s Republic, a dialogue btwn Glaucon and Socrates
Concerned with Justice, idea that we act differently when no one is watching |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Agrees with sociobiologists that primary function of morality is to extend our evolutionary survival
Believes morality based on self sacrifice, altruism, and generosity is evil
It is in our interest to fiercely pursue our own rational self interest, not to be weakened by others who hang on to us
Selfishness is a virtue, but we ought not be self destructive or undermine our own good |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
If someone gives the directive that we ought to leave our body and travel as a non-physical being.
It implies that we are able to leave our body and travel as a non-physical being.
Requiring that we ought do something, suggests that we can follow through and do that thing.
If we cannot do something, it is logically inconsistent to expect that we ought to do it.
Most ethical theories and legal requirements acknowledge this |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| view that all people are selfish in everything they do, their only motive is self interest |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| normative view that people ought to act selfishly and be motivated purely by self interest |
|
|
Term
| Critiquing Ethical Egoism |
|
Definition
James Rachels argues against both psychological and ethical egoism
People are not selfish in everything they do
Even if they do act selfishly sometimes, this is not reason to say they ought to only act selfishly
Glaucon is wrong in his interpretation Re: the Myth of Gyges |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Core purpose of many religions to serve as means for spiritual transformation
Religion provides a metaphysical grounding for morality; Moral principles are worth following b/c God endorses them.
But is something right/good because God commands it, OR does God endorse it b/c it is independently right/good? |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
The view that we act morally when we do what God commands us to do.
Divine commands are not intended to be questioned, analyzed, or negotiated. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
The ethical theory based on the view that universal moral values can be discovered in nature by the faculty of reason.
Developed by St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) in response to disturbing probs of Divine Command Theory
Individuals who are fully morally developed are able through reflection and reason to discover ethical truths
God commands are consistent with ethical truths, but it is b/c they are true regardless of his commanding
Eternal law, Divine law, Natural law, Human law
Purpose of laws is to “make men good by habituating them to good works” |
|
|
Term
| Dr. King and Natural Law Theory |
|
Definition
agreed with St. Thomas Aquinas’s idea of natural law that contains universal moral principles by which a society could be judged.
King explains his commitment to natural law in Letter from a Birmingham Jail
2 types of laws: Just and Unjust
“An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law.”
“An unjust law is no law at all” so, it is right to disobey an unjust law.
“An unjust law is a code that a numerical or power majority compels a minority group to obey but does not make binding on itself.” |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Ethical theory that we should act to promote the greatest amount of happiness (and create the least amount of suffering possible) for the greatest number of people.
A consequentialist theory
Applies to everyone an ethical absolutist theory
Response to the unsatisfying theory of ethical egoism and the worsening conditions of the majority of people in the industrial centers of England. |
|
|
Term
| Bentham’s Utilitarian Theory |
|
Definition
Bentham’s principle of utility endorses all action that “tend to produce benefit, advantage, pleasure, good, or happiness” or on the other hand “prevent the happening of mischief, pain, evil or unhappiness”
Individuals and governments should all apply the principle of utility. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| view that pleasure is the only thing truly of value |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| people are only necessarily governed by pleasure and pain |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| people should be governed by pleasure and pain |
|
|
Term
| Utilitarian Calculus and the Hedon |
|
Definition
How do we measure how much pleasure is produced?
Its intensity
Its duration
Its certainty or uncertainty
Its remoteness or closeness
Its fecundity (chance that pleasure will follow pleasure, pain follow pain)
Its purity (chance that pain will follow pleasure, pleasure follow pain)
Its extent (# of persons)
A unit of pleasure is a “hedon”
Bentham did not consider the motives or intentions in his calculations, the consequences of the motives/intentions determine the moral goodness and badness. |
|
|
Term
| Mill’s Utilitarian Theory |
|
Definition
agreed with the general tenets of Bentham’s Utilitarianism
However, he distinguished between higher and lower pleasures, whereas Bentham did not
Higher pleasures: reading poetry and philosophy, attending a symphony, drinking a fine wine
Lower pleasures: reading the tabloids, attending a baseball game, drinking a cheap beer |
|
|
Term
| Concerns with Utilitarianism |
|
Definition
Because it is consequentialist, what happens to our intentions or actions; we do not know the outcome until after we have made these initial calculations.
Can we extend this theory beyond a local domain or the individual? Is it really appropriate for a more complicated national or international application? |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
People who are responsible for making moral decisions on their own behalf and sometimes on behalf of others
responsible for the initial decision, carrying it forth, and for any repercussions |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
People/beings who are unable for any reason to make moral decisions on their own behalf
Moral consideration is extended to these beings, but they are not responsible for their situation or the choices made by others on their behalf. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| we should act to promote the greatest amount of happiness and pleasure (create the least amount of pain) for the greatest number |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| we should extend utilitarianism to animals, not cause them pain and suffering |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
(Kant)
ethical perspective that moral value is determined by fulfilling one’s duty |
|
|
Term
| Kantian Ethical Principles |
|
Definition
Deontology
Rational faculties are used to discover moral laws that are universally binding on all people.
Inclinations, consequences, and all other moral bases are irretrievably flawed
Developed a metaphysics of morals– using reason, a priori truths to find the reality of morality that is both in us and exists outside of us.
The human will, specifically a “good will” is as important as reason in having people respond to moral laws |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
a moral law/rule
All imperatives are directives or moral commands in the form “one ought to…” |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
does not express a value independently, but is the means to another end.
If you want to be a kind person, then you should help others and be friendly. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
commands moral obligation independent of experience or consequences. It is always derived from reason and always carries overriding value. It is an end in itself.
It is wrong to steal |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
The idea that we should turn our attention to the goodness of the person/actor with less focus on any one act is the basis of virtue theory
A theory that judges character |
|
|
Term
| Aristotle’s Virtue Ethics |
|
Definition
We all have an ultimate goal or purpose – to be a good/virtuous person
Argued that virtue is the mean/middle between the two extremes that are both types of vice
We ought to practice temperance
Two types of virtues: intellectual and moral
Intellectual: wisdom, knowledge, rationality, clarity of understanding, intelligence
Moral: compassion, generousity, truthfulness, friendliness |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Ethical Subjectivism
Cultural Relativism |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Ethical Egoism
-> Ayn Rand
Divine Command theory
Natural Law theory
Utilitarianism
-> Peter Singer
Kantian (duty) ethics
Virtue (Aristotelian) ethics |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Christianity – 2 billion members
Islam – 1.5 billion members
Hinduism – 1 billion members
Buddhism – 376 million members
Confucianism - ~300 million members
Taoism – 250 million members
Judaism – 130 million members
Baha’i – 8 million members
Wicca – largest neo-pagan, earth based religion |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| common to Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and Baha’i religions |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| many faces, periods, and forms of god expressed in hundreds of deities (gods and goddesses), pluralistic understanding of god |
|
|
Term
| God as energy, supernatural force |
|
Definition
| in various forms applies for pantheists, Taoists, Wicca, and other earth based religions |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
one singular God
Abrahamic God |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
more than one God
Wicca, the god and goddess |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
one ultimate God, but many manifestations of God
Hinduism – Vishnu and hundreds of avatars/deities |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| god is a spirit or energy force that is everywhere, especially strong in nature |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Mystical Experience (James) - cannot be completely described, seems to defy expression, can only be understood by experience |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Mystical Experience (James) - state of knowledge or enlightenment, full of illuminations, revelations |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Mystical Experience (James) - do not last long, memory fades greatly after experience, but when they recur memory identifies with richness of experience |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Mystical Experience (James) - once in the state, the person feels held by a superior power, not in control of the experience |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Through a religious (mystical) experience, God and religious ideas are directly revealed
Through faith – committing to the belief in a God without having proof of its existence
Through reason (deism) – understanding the reality of God’s existence through reasons, observation of the world, and logical proof |
|
|
Term
| Cosmological arguments for the Existence of God |
|
Definition
| God must exist in order to explain the origins of the universe |
|
|
Term
| Argument from motion for the Existence of God |
|
Definition
“whatever is put into motion is put in motion by another, for nothing can be in motion except it is in potentiality to that towards which it is in motion” “If that by which it is put in motion be itself put in motion, then this also must needs be put in motion by another, and that by another again. But this cannot go on to infinity, b/c then there would be no first mover and consequently no other mover…”
“Therefore, it is necessary to arrive at a first mover, put in motion by no other; and this everyone understands to be God” |
|
|
Term
| Argument from cause for God (Aquinas) |
|
Definition
| there must be a first cause, and that is God |
|
|
Term
| Argument from contingency/necessity for God (Aquinas) |
|
Definition
“We find in nature things that are possible to be and not to be…” “If everything is possible not to be, then at one time there could have been nothing in existence. If this were true, even now there would be nothing in existence b/c that which does not exist only begins to exist by something already existing.” “There must exist something the existence of which is necessary”
“Therefore, we cannot but postulate the existence of some being having of itself its own necessity, an not receiving it from another, but rather causing in others their necessity. This all men speak of as God.” |
|
|
Term
| Teleological Argument for God |
|
Definition
| God must exist to account for the complex order we observe in the world. |
|
|
Term
| Argument from design for God |
|
Definition
| “Whatever lacks intelligence cannot move toward an end, unless it be directed by some being endowed with knowledge and intelligence; as the arrow is shot to its mark by the archer. Therefore, some intelligent being exists by whom all natural things are directed to their end; and this being we call God.” |
|
|
Term
| William Paley’s Teleological argument for God |
|
Definition
While some things do not need a creator, things with order and many parts, things with intelligence do need a creator.
A watch needs a creator – man; likewise the world being so well ordered needs a creator – God |
|
|
Term
| Argument from Morality for God |
|
Definition
Humans share a sense of morality
Major world ethical systems, even in diverse religions, share many moral principles
Therefore, there is a supremely moral mind, a highest good – God |
|
|
Term
| Responses to Traditional Arg. For Existence of God (Russell) |
|
Definition
St. Thomas Aquinas argued there must be a first mover, and first cause. That first mover and cause is God.
Bertrand Russell responds in “Why I am Not a Christian”
“If everything must have a cause, then God must have a cause. If there can be anything without a cause, it may just as well be the world as God.”
“There is no reason why the world could not have come into being w/o a cause; nor, on the other hand, is there any reason why it should not have always existed.” |
|
|
Term
| Russell’s Response to Argument from Design |
|
Definition
Argument from design: “everything in the world is made just so that we can manage to live in the world, and if the world was ever so little different, we could not manage to live in it.”
Response: since the time of Darwin we have insight into how the creatures of the world changed (natural selection) to adapt to the imperfect world. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| natural disasters such as earthquakes, hurricanes, tornadoes, droughts and pestilence, starvation, etc… |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| pain and suffering inflicted by other people such as murder, rape, abuse, theft, psychological torture, warfare, genocide, discrimination, persecution, etc |
|
|
Term
| Why does God permit Evil? (John Hick) |
|
Definition
God created humans with free will, the potential to do good but also the potential to do bad or evil acts
Preventing moral evil would get in the way of free will
Morality and responsibility go hand in hand; God holds us responsible for our free actions
While God could intervene, it would mean negating the laws of science. God allows natural disasters b/c they are in line with the laws of science.
The world needs both pleasure and pain to help us learn and for us to develop our souls. A world without evil or pain would not allow us to make our souls.
A perfectly enjoyable world would not push us to be better people or offer challenges to rise and meet. Our morality would be undeveloped in a peaceful world. |
|
|
