Study Guides (380,000)
CA (150,000)
U of G (8,000)
PHIL (100)
Study Guide

[PHIL 1010] - Final Exam Guide - Ultimate 29 pages long Study Guide!


Department
Philosophy
Course Code
PHIL 1010
Professor
Karyn Freedman
Study Guide
Final

This preview shows pages 1-3. to view the full 29 pages of the document.
UofG
PHIL 1010
FINAL EXAM
STUDY GUIDE

Only pages 1-3 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

Only pages 1-3 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

PHIL DAY 1
Contemporary and political philosophy: looking at contemporary issues and literature
- Fundamental topics:
1. Who gets what? (Resources, edu. Health care)
- Theories of justice (best way to organize state)
- 2. According to whom? Who had political authority and power to distribute such goods)
Eey plausile politial theoy has the same ultimate alue, hih is euality
- Which theory understands equality best
- Treating each other as equals
Normative political theory: how a society ought to be structure
Ex. How do we in fact treat strangers
Descriptive political theory: how a society is, in fact structured
Ex. Forget how everyone is acting, how should they act
Equality as a foundational: idea that equality is intrinsically valuable and the foundation of any
reasonable political theory
Ex. Do we value hammers as an object but valued instead because of what they get us
(instrumentally value)
Intrinsically value: something is valued in and of itself
Ex. Friendship
Instrumental good: something that is valued as a means to an end
Logic
- Correct reasoning
- An argument consists of a set of sentences consisting of one or more premises, which
contain the evidence and a conclusion which is supposed to follow from the premises
- Ex. Of argument:
Socrates is a man (premises)
All men are mortal (p)
Thus Socrates is mortal (conclusion)
Conclusion must be true of premises is true
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version

Only pages 1-3 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

EXAMPLE 1
Socrates was a US president (all statements false, but if the premises is true then conclusion is true)
All US presidents are women
Therefore Socrates was a woman (conclusion)
OR
Obama was a US president
All US Presidents are male
Therefore Obama was a man
Once in a while one comes across an argument that is both valid and has true premises, when that
happens was call that argument sound
- Sound argument is:
1. Valid
2. Premises is all true
Ex. All US presidents have been male, JFK was a US president =
Therefore JKF was male
- Validity requires entailment conclusion has to follow the premises
Invalid: argument by contrast is when you have all true premises is valid but conclusion is false
- One in which the truth of premises does not guarantee truth of conclusion
- Is true conclusion valid?
- If an argument has true premises and conclusion is it valid?
- can you have valid argument with false premises and true conclusion?
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version