Philosophy

Epistemology

1. The Three Types of Knowledge

Before defining it, you have to know what kind you’re talking about:

• Ability Knowledge: Knowing "how" (e.g., riding a bike).

• Acquaintance Knowledge: Knowing "of" (e.g., knowing a friend or a city).

• Propositional Knowledge: Knowing "that" (e.g., knowing that 2 + 2 = 4). This is the focus of the exam.

2. The Tripartite View (JTB)

Plato’s traditional definition. For you to "know" something ($P$), three conditions must be met:

1. Justification: You have good reasons for it.

2. Truth: It is actually a fact.

3. Belief: You personally accept it as true.

3. The "Gettier" Problem

Edmund Gettier proved JTB isn't enough. He used "Double Luck" cases where you have a justified true belief, but it’s only true by coincidence (e.g., checking a broken clock that happens to show the right time). This suggests JTB is not sufficient for knowledge.

4. The Four Major Fixes (Post-Gettier)

To solve the Gettier problem, philosophers added or swapped conditions:

• Infallibilism: Knowledge must be certain. If there is any doubt at all, it isn’t knowledge. (Very strict; rules out almost everything).

• No False Lemmas (JTBN): You can't claim knowledge if your justification relies on a false assumption (a "false lemma").

• Reliabilism ($K = RTB$): Swaps "Justification" for a Reliable Process. Knowledge is a true belief produced by a process that usually gets it right (like good eyesight vs. a lucky guess).

• Virtue Epistemology: Knowledge is "Apt" belief. It must be:

  1. Accurate (True).

  2. Adroit (Produced by an intellectual skill).

  3. Apt (True because it was adroit).

Moral Philosophy

1. The Three Normative Theories

These are the frameworks for deciding what is "right."

• Utilitarianism (Teleological): Focused on consequences.

  • Bentham (Act): Maximize pleasure, minimize pain (The Hedonic Calculus).

  • Mill (Rule): Focuses on general rules that promote happiness; distinguishes between Higher (intellectual) and Lower (physical) pleasures.

• Kantian Deontology (Duty-based): Focused on intentions and rules.

  • The Categorical Imperative: Act only on maxims you can "will to be a universal law" and treat humans as "ends in themselves," never as a mere means.

• Aristotelian Virtue Ethics (Character-based): Focused on the person, not the act.

  • Eudaimonia: The goal of life is "flourishing."

  • The Golden Mean: Virtue is the middle ground between two vices (e.g., Courage is the mean between Cowardice and Rashness).

2. Meta-ethics

The "higher level" study of what moral language actually does. It splits into two camps:

Cognitivism (Moral statements can be true or false):

• Naturalism: "Good" is a natural property (like "happiness").

• Non-Naturalism (Intuitionism): "Good" is a simple, unanalyzable property we just "know" via intuition (like the color yellow).

• Error Theory (Mackie): Moral statements try to be true, but because there are no objective moral facts, they are all false.

Non-Cognitivism (Moral statements are not true/false):

• Emotivism (Ayer): Moral claims are just expressions of emotion ("Boo/Hooray" theory).

• Prescriptivism (Hare): Moral claims are actually commands or recommendations for how others should act.

3. Applied Ethics

You apply the theories above to four specific issues for the exam:

1. Stealing

2. Simulated Killing (Video games/plays)

3. Eating Animals

4. Telling Lies

Metaphysics of God

1. The Concept of God

Philosophers define the "God of Abraham" with four "Omni-" attributes:

• Omnipotence: All-powerful (Can God create a stone so heavy He can't lift it?).

• Omniscience: All-knowing (Does this negate human free will?).

• Omnibenevolence: All-loving/perfectly good.

• Atemporal/Sempiternal: God is either outside of time (eternal) or moves through time with us (sempiternal).

2. Arguments FOR God (The Big Three)

• Ontological (A Priori): God exists by definition.

  • Anselm: God is "that than which nothing greater can be conceived." To exist in reality is greater than existing only in the mind; therefore, God must exist.

• Teleological (Design): The world looks "tuned."

  • Paley’s Watch: If you find a watch on a heath, its complexity implies a designer. The universe is more complex than a watch; therefore, it has a designer.

• Cosmological (First Cause): Everything has a cause.

  • Aquinas’ 3 Ways: Motion, Causation, and Contingency. There must be a "First Mover" or "Uncaused Cause" to start the chain.

3. Arguments AGAINST God

• The Problem of Evil: The most famous "God-killer" argument.

  • Logical Problem: It is a contradiction for an all-powerful, all-loving God to exist alongside evil (Epicurus).

  • Evidential Problem: The amount of pointless suffering (e.g., a fawn dying in a forest fire) makes God’s existence highly unlikely.

• Theodicies (The Defenses): * Free Will Defense: Evil is the price of human freedom.

  • Soul-Making (Hick): Evil is necessary for us to develop virtues like courage and empathy.

4. Religious Language

If God is infinite, can we even talk about Him?

• Cognitivism: Religious claims (e.g., "God exists") are factual and can be true or false.

• Non-Cognitivism: Religious claims aren't facts; they are expressions of "bliks" (foundational worldviews) or ways of life.

• Falsification (Flew): If you won't allow anything to count as evidence against your belief, your "God" dies the "death of a thousand qualifications."

Metaphysics of Mind

1. Dualism (The "Two-Substance/Property" View)

Dualists believe the mental and physical are fundamentally different.

• Substance Dualism (Descartes): The mind is a non-physical "thing" (res cogitans) and the body is a physical "thing" (res extensa). They interact in the pineal gland.

• Property Dualism: There is only one substance (the brain), but it has two distinct properties: physical ones (mass, neurons) and non-physical ones (consciousness/qualia).

  • Qualia: The subjective "what it is like" quality of an experience (the redness of a rose, the sting of a bee).

2. Physicalism (The "One-Substance" View)

Physicalists argue that everything about the mind can be explained by physical facts.

• Philosophical Behaviorism: Mental states are just "dispositions" to behave. To be "in pain" is simply the tendency to cry out or wince.

• Mind-Brain Identity Theory: Mental states are ontologically identical to brain states (e.g., "Pain" is literally just "C-fibers firing").

• Eliminative Materialism (The Churchlands): Our common-sense talk of "beliefs" and "desires" (Folk Psychology) is a failed scientific theory. We should replace it with pure neuroscience.

• Functionalism: A mental state is defined by its functional role (Input $\rightarrow$ Internal Processing $\rightarrow$ Output). If a computer or an alien functions like a human brain, it has a mind.

3. The "Kill Shots" (Key Arguments)

These are the essays you’ll likely have to write:

• The Knowledge Argument (Mary’s Room): Mary is a scientist who knows every physical fact about color but has lived in a black-and-white room. When she steps outside and sees red, does she learn something new? If yes, physicalism is false.

• The Philosophical Zombie (Chalmers): It is conceivable to have a "zombie" that is physically identical to a human but has no internal consciousness. If this is possible, the mind is more than just the physical.

• The Problem of Other Minds: If my mind is private, how do I know you have one? (The argument from analogy vs. the best hypothesis).

4. Issues with Dualism

• The Interaction Problem: How can a non-physical ghost move a physical arm? (The "Conceptual" and "Empirical" problems of causal closure).

• Category Mistake (Ryle): Descartes is like a tourist looking at the buildings of Oxford and then asking, "But where is the University?" The "University" (mind) is just how the parts (body) are organized.