Class Notes (887,053)
CA (530,873)
UTSC (32,326)
Philosophy (967)
PHLD79H3 (2)
all (1)
Reference Guide

Philosophy - Reference Guides

4 Pages

Course Code

This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full 4 pages of the document.

Loved by over 2.2 million students

Over 90% improved by at least one letter grade.

Leah — University of Toronto

OneClass has been such a huge help in my studies at UofT especially since I am a transfer student. OneClass is the study buddy I never had before and definitely gives me the extra push to get from a B to an A!

Leah — University of Toronto
Saarim — University of Michigan

Balancing social life With academics can be difficult, that is why I'm so glad that OneClass is out there where I can find the top notes for all of my classes. Now I can be the all-star student I want to be.

Saarim — University of Michigan
Jenna — University of Wisconsin

As a college student living on a college budget, I love how easy it is to earn gift cards just by submitting my notes.

Jenna — University of Wisconsin
Anne — University of California

OneClass has allowed me to catch up with my most difficult course! #lifesaver

Anne — University of California
l e a r n • r e f e r e n c e • r e v i e w permacharts TM PPhilosophy METAPHYSICS I: UNIVERSALS METAPHYSICS II: • Universals are entities that exist beyond space and time; physical objects and PARTICULARS qualities resemble universals to some extent (such as a person is tall because he/she partakes of the tallness more than shortness) ESSENTIALISM • Particulars (individuals) are objects or events within space and time which manifest • Particulars possess essences (something that characteristics of one or more universals (such as the tall person is a particular or makes an object what it is, without which individual) that object would cease to be itself) • Distinguishes between essential and • A particular can admit contrary universals (such as a person can possess tallness accidental traits of a particular and shortness in different quantities); only universals remain fixed and unchanging Counter-Example: A syllogistic scenario that REALISM contradicts essentialism; subjects it to de re reading • Universals have the only true reality, or possess greater reality than particulars S1: Atomic scientists are necessarily scientists, • Reality would continue as it is, even if there were no human subjects to perceive it, but are not necessarily Spanish. because it has an essence independent of human perception S2: Spanish women are necessarily Spanish, but not necessarily scientists REALISM OF NATURES S3: Maria is an atomic scientist and Spanish. Medieval Each object in the real world participates in the nature of ideal Therefore, S4: Maria is necessarily a scientist but Realism of itself; that nature may be absolute, specific, or generic not necessarily Spanish, and necessarily Spanish but not necessarily a scientist. Platonic Each object or quality in the real world owes its existence to • S4 forces false conclusion that Maria does not Realism resemblance to, or participation in, ideal form of itself; forms exist because her description (S3) entails exist beyond realm of senses (eternal and immutable) contradiction • This objection is sound if it is limited to de re Note: Third type of realism states that each object in real world is derived from a analysis; contradiction does not occur on de law or model that exists abstractly in natural science dicto reading REALISM OF THINGS Anti-realism Refusal to accept unverifiable statements (that is, truths that cannot be verified) Common Sense All objects outside the mind exist in a concrete sense Realism • It is given because it conforms to common experience Neo-realism Objects external to the mind are concrete entities and do not depend on the mind in order to exist p Critical Realism Mind apprehends external objects as they are duplicated in the e mind • Object is inaccessible; only its conceptual counterpart can be mentally perceived r m DEFENSES OF REALISM a BARE PARTICULARS Abstracta A term (such as tallness, shortness) referring to a quality that is • Each substance is distinct because of bare c considered separately from the particular object that exhibits it particulars that determine the main h • The existence of abstracta in language suggests that such characteristics of the substance qualities exist separately as universals a Predication Logical propositions take the form of a subject and predicate • Bare particulars are those parts of a particular r (such as in the proposition “Susan is tall,” Susan is the subject without which it would cease to be what it is and is tall is the predicate) • The predicates of true propositions t would be meaningless if they did not refer to universals BUNDLE THEORY s Resemblance Universals account for the resemblance of particulars . • The form “Susan resembles Jennifer” is logically incomplete; it • Each particular is nothing more than a bundle requires existence of some universal to determine exactly how of different kinds of items, or different c two particulars, Susan and Jennifer, resemble each other properties that constitute it o • Each particular is distinct because it is logically impossible for two or more objects to possess m CONCEPTUALISM identical properties • Universals depend on human perception to exist DUALISM • They do not exist beyond the time they are perceived or conceptualized • Any theory that posits the existence of two mutually exclusive substances or conditions NOMINALISM • Most types of dualism concentrate on the • Universals lack a real existence; they are merely abstract terms or names mind-body split • As opposed to Realism, particulars exist prior to universals Examples: How can humans reconcile mental and physical stimuli? • If only physical • If there were no language for humans to conceive of universals, then universals substances exist (a claim of Materialism), then would not exist do thoughts and sensations not exist? 1 PHILOSOPHY • A-850-8 © 1998-2012 Mindsource Technologies Inc. l e a r n • r e f e r e n c e • r e v i e w permachartsTM METAPHYSICS II: PARTICULARS (CONT’D) ETHICS I: METAETHICS • Analytical approach to other fields of ethics, concerned with DUALISM CONT’D defining the assumptions and concepts inherent in ethics Berkeleianism Mind perceives properties of physical Absolutism A strong version of objectivism; there can substances, rather than substances be only one valid morality in the world, themselves; existence of physical matter is which is eternal and superhuman • Certain denied • God is responsible for presence of religious moral systems are absolutist ideas in mind; we receive messages from God, which are natural laws (physical realm) Conventionalist Ethical qualities are true within a given Cartesian Dualism Human reality consists of a dualism Ethical culture or society • According to the between living in a world of physical Relativism diversity thesis, morality varies among different cultures, and no moral views apply objects and thinking things that exist in a to all cultures • According to the purely conceptual form • Human dependency thesis, each morality is experience entails interaction between the justified through its acceptance within its cognitive and physical worlds • God is culture responsible for this interaction between the mental and physical realms • Thought is Moral Realism Ethical qualities are objectively true, and unextended (non-spatial); physical bodies independent of individuals who form them are extended (able to extend through • Assumes the existence of an external space) reality which must be made to correspond with ethical appraisals of it • Some moral Epiphenomenalism Consciousness is a by-product realists (Plato, Moore) postulate ethical (epiphenomenon) of the neural processes judgments to be purely conceptual; other that are responsible for it • Consciousness moral realists (Aristotle, Mill) view ethical cannot be reduced to physical matter, even judgments as empirical though it stems from the physical substance of the brain Naturalism Everything (including abstract concepts) is Identity Theories Identity theories are monistic, not dualistic; governed by natural (scientific) laws • Justification of moral codes follows some they postulate that mental and physical system of scientific justification • The universe states constitute a unity • Schelling sees is one; all objects in it and all aspects of it mental and physical states as part of the are equally accessible to scientific study same whole which he calls the Absolute • The real and ideal exist as opposites Non-cognitivism Ethical knowledge is impossible; ethical within the absolute, with the ideal as statements are descriptive expressions of positive value towards which everything subject’s attitude to some object or tends • Spinoza views both mental and condition • Neither empirical nor ideal physical states as parts of a structure that frame of reference exists for ethics; only consists of the whole world • Complete individual’s subjective emotions dictate structure is substance, nature, or God (all moral judgments parts are necessary to whole); Spinoza Objectivism/ Qualifies moral realism by stating that claims that entire world is a unity Ethical objective ethical qualities are built by human Kantian Dualism Reality consists of a dualism between the Constructivism choice; ethical qualities exist only through phenomenal world (the world as it the agreed impartial choice of all people appears to us) and the noumenal world Rationalism Ideal view of ethics, in which morality is a (the world as it is in itself) • Humans can purely conceptual science based on reason have no knowledge of the noumenal realm • Rationalism assumes moral judgments are • Kant defines noumenon as the object of m a non-sensuous intuition, but states that a priori and independent of the natural o world • Ethical justification follows only sensuous intuitions can exist; mathematical model of assessment c therefore, even for Kant, noumenon is . described as merely x Materialism Hobbes denies existence of mental reality; s only physical matter • Interaction of mind t and body is not a question; since all reality r is reducible to physical matter, there is no ETHICS II: MORALITY THEORIES mind-body split • Mental processes are a TELEOLOGICAL JUSTIFICATIONS OF RIGHT ACTION result of external stimuli on senses • Consequences (end or purpose) of moral code are more h Occasionalism Malebranche denies that mental and important than intrinsic value of code c physical can interact, and explains practical human experience by means of God who • A moral code is a means to achieve the ends of morality (rather a performs physical movements on occasion than the code being an end in itself) of matching mental processes • Teleological theories disagree about specific goals of morality m Parallelism Mental and physical phenomena are Ethical Egoism Moral acts benefit the interest of the r incidentally but precisely synchronized (Hobbes, individual • An action’s effect on others is e • There is no causal relationship between Locke) morally irrelevant to the action (unless it has events in physical world and mind’s an effect on the self-interest of the individual) p apprehension of them • God or some • Self–interest can refer to happiness, wealth, other power initiates and regulates power, and so on – separately, or in any synchronicity of mental and external combination phenomena Utilitarianism Moral acts benefit everyone who is affected Platonic Dualism The physical world is impermanent and a (Mill) by them • Everyone’s self-interest is taken source of opinion; purely intellectual realm, into equal consideration attained through philosophy, is the source Ethical Moral acts benefit everyone except the agent of immutable forms or ideas • The realm of Altruism of the action • How agent is affected is forms is the only valid reality; physical morally irrelevant to action (unless effect on reality is a false imitation of forms agent changes consequences for all others) 2 PHILOSOPHY • A-850-8 © 1998-2012 Mindsource Technologies Inc. l e a r n • r e f e r e n c e • r e v i e w permachartsM ETHICS II: MORALITY EPISTEMOLOGY I: THEORIES (CONT’D) THEORIES OF KNOWLEDGE • Investigates knowledge in terms of its validity, origins, and structure GOODNESS • Problem of goodness can be approached in terms of what • Epistemological debate centers around which branch, metaphysics constitutes a good life (assuming that a good life is the or epistemology, has priority • Descartes, Locke, and Kant support the
More Less
Unlock Document
Subscribers Only

Only page 1 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

Unlock Document
Subscribers Only
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version

Unlock Document
Subscribers Only

Log In


Don't have an account?

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.