HU2700 Final Examinationfall, 2001

HU2700 Final ExaminationFall, 2001

______

Part A: For each of the following terms and names, give a precise definition, description, explanation, or identification as appropriate. Give enough information to show that you clearly understand and/or recognize each item. Do not go into a discussion of related issues. E.g., if the item refers to a particular theory or argument, do not discuss its pros and cons. Be specific. Include essential information, but do not include peripheral material. (4 points each)

1. Categorical Imperative6. intrinsic value

2. compatibilism7. realism

3. continuity of consciousness8. positive right (noun)

4. Rene Descartes9. pragmatic theory of truth

5. form of knowledge 10. Socrates

______

Part B: Answer 5 of the following discussion questions. Indicate clearly which questions you are answering. Be sure to answer all parts of the question. Make your answers concise and complete. Avoid irrelevant discussion. Say exactly what you mean. Do not expect the grader to read your mind. (12 points each)

1. For each of the following deductive arguments, classify the argument as (a) valid or invalid and as (b) sound or unsound. If you believe that you do not have enough information to perform a classification, explain why and say what additional information is needed. Justify all of your answers. Be specific.

(1) All states of the United States are in the(2) Not all animals are meat-eaters.

northern hemisphere. Horses are animals.

Canada is a state of the United States. Therefore, horses are not meat-eaters.

Therefore, Canada is in the northern hemisphere.

1. Identify one of the main metaphysical issues we have studied in this course. Detail an important argument on each side of that issue. Be specific.

1. Can one consistently accept both materialism and libertarianism? Explain. Can one consistently accept both idealism and determinism? Explain. Be specific.

1. Identify and describe one rationalist theory of knowledge that we have studied in this course. Explain why it is a rationalist theory. Identify and describe one empiricist theory of knowledge that we have studied in this course. Explain why it is an empiricist theory. Be specific.

1. What exactly is skepticism? In what ways was David Hume a skeptic? I.e., what exactly was he skeptical about? How did Kant attempt to avoid Hume’s skeptical conclusions? Be specific.

1. Define “cultural relativism” and “ethical relativism.” How exactly are they different? Can one consistently accept both cultural relativism and ethical absolutism? Explain. Be specific.

1. State one consequentialist theory of obligation, and explain precisely what makes it a consequentialist theory. State one nonconsequentialist theory of obligation, and explain precisely what makes it a nonconsequentialist theory. Be specific.