Study Questions for Final Exam
Introduction to Philosophy (34-110-30)
Instructor: Dr. M. Guarini

Your final exam will consist of two questions drawn from the list below.  The questions will be selected at random, so strategic studying (i.e. only preparing for some of the questions) is strongly discouraged.

The exam is in CE 2100 on December 14 at 7:00 pm.  It is three hours long.

It is a closed book exam.  No aids of any type are allowed.
 

(1) What is Rationalism?  What is Empiricism?  Explain why Descartes is often referred to as a Rationalist.  Explain why Hume is often referred to as an Empiricist. If you were to use these terms to refer to Plato, would you say that he is more of a Rationalist or an Empiricist?  Explain.  This question is asking you to compare and contrast the epistemologies of each of the aforementioned philosophers.

(2) Hume claims that, “the effect is totally different from the cause, and consequently can never be discovered in it.”  He is insistent that, "every effect is a distinct event from its cause" (Enquiry, section IV).  He goes so far as to argue that there can be no rational justification of cause and effect.  What is his argument for that position?  Do you think Descartes would agree or not? Explain.  Discuss the views of Descartes and Hume on cause and effect, and explain who (if either) you think has the more defensible position.  Defend your position.

(3) According to Hume, what is the relationship between reason and passion?  What argument does he give for his position? What are Plato’s views on Reason, Spirit, and Appetites?  Compare and contrast Hume with Plato.  Who (if either) is closer to the truth?  Defend your position.  Be sure to discuss the issue of whether reason can adjudicate between competing passions.

(4) What does Descartes say that mind is?  What does he say that body is?  According to Descartes, what sort of thing can think?  What reasons does he offer for his position?  How would he answer the following question: is it possible, in principle, for a machine (understood as a strictly material thing) to think?  According to Turing, is it possible, in principle, for a machine to think?  What is the test Turing offers to determine whether a machine can think?  Do you think that one day it might be possible to make a machine that thinks?  If so, point out where you think the problems are in Descartes’ position.  If not, point out why you think Turing is wrong to think that machines can think.