Docsity
Docsity

Prepare for your exams
Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity


Earn points to download
Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan


Guidelines and tips
Guidelines and tips

4 Questions on Introduction to Philosophy Ethics - Exam 2 | PHIL 102, Exams of Introduction to Philosophy

Material Type: Exam; Professor: Moore; Class: Intro to Philosophical Inquiry; Subject: Philosophy; University: Lander University; Term: Spring 2009;

Typology: Exams

Pre 2010

Uploaded on 08/19/2009

koofers-user-3re-1
koofers-user-3re-1 🇺🇸

10 documents

1 / 5

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
Phil. 102: Introduction to Philosophy
Test 2: Philosophical Ethics
Spring 2009 c
2009 GFDL
Caution: All work on this test must be your own work. Especially, note the
following from the Syllabus for this course. “It is imperative that tests or parts
of tests are not copies or simple paraphrases of notes or tutorials taken from the
Web. All writing is to be the student’s own interpretations and work.” If you
use quotations from the Internet or from books, you must use a proper citation
method: e.g.,MLA,APA, or Chicago Style.
When submitting tests, do not include the questions. Just write the number
of the question followed by the answer. Statistical checks for academic honesty
are done on every paper for true/false, distinctions, and essay questions. All
work must be done independently and without help from other students.
1 True–False Questions (25 pts.)
Directions: State whether or not the following sentences are “true” or are
“false.” Just type the question number and the answer without the question
asked.
1. Anselm’s Ontological Argument is an argument
that does not rely on empirical or scientific evidence.
2. Aristotle’s notion of “material cause” is the
same concept as the current scientific use of “cause” today.
3. Aquinas’ Argument from Gradation relies on
the concept of “The Great Chain of Being.”
4. Aquinas’ Argument from Gradation (or De-
grees of Being) not only attempts to prove God’s existence, but also proves,
according to Aquinas, the existence of an all-Evil Being at the other end
of the scale.
5. The Argument from Design is also known as
the Teleological Argument.
1
pf3
pf4
pf5

Partial preview of the text

Download 4 Questions on Introduction to Philosophy Ethics - Exam 2 | PHIL 102 and more Exams Introduction to Philosophy in PDF only on Docsity!

Phil. 102: Introduction to Philosophy

Test 2: Philosophical Ethics

Spring 2009 ©c2009 GFDL

Caution: All work on this test must be your own work. Especially, note the following from the Syllabus for this course. “It is imperative that tests or parts of tests are not copies or simple paraphrases of notes or tutorials taken from the Web. All writing is to be the student’s own interpretations and work.” If you use quotations from the Internet or from books, you must use a proper citation method: e.g., MLA, APA, or Chicago Style.

When submitting tests, do not include the questions. Just write the number of the question followed by the answer. Statistical checks for academic honesty are done on every paper for true/false, distinctions, and essay questions. All work must be done independently and without help from other students.

1 True–False Questions (25 pts.)

Directions: State whether or not the following sentences are “true” or are “false.” Just type the question number and the answer without the question asked.

  1. Anselm’s Ontological Argument is an argument that does not rely on empirical or scientific evidence.
  2. Aristotle’s notion of “material cause” is the same concept as the current scientific use of “cause” today.
  3. Aquinas’ Argument from Gradation relies on the concept of “The Great Chain of Being.”
  4. Aquinas’ Argument from Gradation (or De- grees of Being) not only attempts to prove God’s existence, but also proves, according to Aquinas, the existence of an all-Evil Being at the other end of the scale.
  5. The Argument from Design is also known as the Teleological Argument.

1 TRUE–FALSE QUESTIONS (25 PTS.)

  1. While crossing a heath, Paley states that one cannot help but wonder precisely how a stone came to exist there.
  2. Pascal believes that since our intuition is often counter-intuitive, God’s existence must be rationally proved.
  3. Gaunilo argues that the concept of a perfect island does not imply that such an island must exist; so likewise, the concept of a perfect God does not thereby imply that God must exist.
  4. Anselm believes that God’s existence could be denied without contradicting oneself since existence cannot be perfect.
  5. Aristotle’s final factor is the form, pattern, or structure of any event.
  6. Occam’s Razor is the principle that, other things being equal, the simplest explanation is the best.
  7. Thomas’ arguments for God’s existence are based on Aristotelian science.
  8. Thomas’ arguments are inductive or a posteri- ori arguments; this means that these arguments only claim that God’s existence is probably proved.
  9. Pascal’s Wager explains a basis for believing in God’s existence in accordance with a kind of rational decision theory.
  10. Teleology is the study of the formal causes of the universe.
  11. An important problem facing Paley’s account of the universe as intricate design and order is that miracles are violations of the laws of science.
  12. Paley rejects the view that since the universe is subject to natural laws the universe must be subject to God as lawgiver.
  13. Pascal believes that the nature of God is not beyond human understanding and description.
  14. Strictly speaking Pascal’s Wager is not intended to be an argument or proof of God’s existence but rather is meant to persuade someone to believe.
  15. When Dostoevsky’s Ivan states, “I hasten to give back my entrance ticket,” he means although he believes in God’s existence, he regrets that he was born into this world.

3 MATCHING (25 PTS.)

3 Matching (25 pts.)

Directions: Match the descriptions in Column 2 with the philosopher in Column 1 by placing the most appropriate number or numbers in the blank spaces pro- vided. Note: (Some statements might not be used, and the number of answers corresponding to each philosophers might differ.)

Column 1 Column 2

Anselm 1. I come to have faith in God by ”acting as if I believed.”

  1. The existence of God cannot be proved.

Aquinas 3. There are five ways to show that God ex- ists.

  1. The heart has its reasons which reason does not know.

Paley 5. Perfection implies existence.

  1. The existence of natural law requires a Lawgiver, or God.

Pascal 7. A purpose of evil is soul-making.

  1. People who necessarily could only choose what is right cannot really be persons.

Hick 9. If the universe is God’s creation, then any limitation of the creation would be shown in the creator.

  1. Just as the function and complexity of a watch implies a watch-maker, so likewise the function and complexity of the universe implies the existence of a universe-maker.

4 ESSAY 30 PTS.

4 Essay 30 pts.

Directions: Answer any two of the following six essay questions in detail. Be sure to include supporting reasons for your view and explain clearly the philo- sophical concepts used. If possible, provide examples illustrating those concepts. Be sure to explain the arguments in so far as possible in your own words. (Do not copy arguments or objections verbatim from the Internet.)

  1. State Paley’s design argument for God’s existence and explain in detail two major criticisms of it.
  2. State Pascal’s Wager in detail; state the conclusion; and explain two major criticisms of it.
  3. What is the traditional problem of evil? Explain thoroughly John Hick’s solution to the problems of moral and nonmoral evil.
  4. State as clearly as possible Anselm’s Ontological Argument. Explain clearly two substantial objections raised against the argument.
  5. State Aquinas’ teleological argument and explain in detail two criticisms of it.
  6. Name, explain, and give an example of each of Aristotle’s four factors of explanation.

name