Study Guides (258,859)
CA (125,024)
UTSG (8,541)
PHL (267)
PHL200Y1 (14)
Final

January-April Lecture Study Notes for Final Exam

19 Pages
142 Views

Department
Philosophy
Course Code
PHL200Y1
Professor
Jennifer Whiting

This preview shows pages 1-3. Sign up to view the full 19 pages of the document.
PHL200 January-April final exam notes
Parmenides: The all is one
Platos self critic of his theory of forms with Parmenides and Zeno
Plato is subjecting his theory of Forms to criticism
129a eidos (form) of likeness and unlikeness
Co-presence of opposites: something can be both like and unlike (eg. tallness and shortness)
Tallness itself cannot be both tall and short, therefore, a form cannot have a co-presence of
opposites
2 possibilities for the Forms: a) things we can grasp or b) the properties that reside in these things
Third Man Argument:
1. One over many assumption if there exists a plurality of F things, then there is some one thing,
predicated of all, in virtue of which they are all [called] F
2. Self-predication assumption what is predicated of a plurality of F things is itself F
3. Non-identity assumption what is predicated of a plurality of things is always different from that
of which it is predicated
2 major ways in which Plato and Aristotle differ: Metaphysics and Conception of Forms
The Forms act as causal accounts for why a person has a certain property (tall, short, beautiful,
intelligent, etc.)
Aristotle’s solution to Platos theory of Forms: The Categories
The Categories listed in chapter 4:
SUBSTANCE: what is it?
QUANTITY: how much?
QUALITY: what is it like?
RELATIVE: double, half, larger
WHERE: in the market-place
WHEN: yesterday, last year
BEING IN A POSITION: is lying, is sitting
HAVING: has shoes on
ACTING ON: cutting, burning
BEING AFFECTED: being cut, being burned
The categories are not just words (linguistic) but also ontological (concerned with existence)
Example.
SAID OF
(essential)
NOT SAID OF
(accidental)
IN
(non-substance)
Knowledge An individual grammatical
knowledge
NOT INMan An individual man
www.notesolution.com
(substance)
2 ways of predication:
All of the SAID OF predications are ways of classifying things, whereas IN predications
characterize things (what things are like)
Differentials: e.g. footed 2 footed, 4 footed
- can be used as predications
Aristotle believes that neither the name or definition can be predicated
- definitions cannot be perceived as the same for all names (e.g. animal being applied to a man
vs. a horse)
2 types of distinction: non-substance vs. substance & universals vs. particulars
Primary substances cannot exist without secondary substances, they go hand in hand in an
important way
each of these things” meaning secondary substances
**Metaphysics 139a
[Our distinction between actuality and potentiality explains why universals cannot be substances]
For if no substance can be composed of universals (because a universal signifies this sort of
thing, not a this) and if no substance can be composed of substances actually present in it, then it
follows that every substance will be incomposite, so that none will have any account.
nothing that belongs universally is not a substance reflects a change in views from the
categories (secondary substance)
- contrast between a “this” and a “this sort of thing
- “it” refers to what is predicated in common
Aristotle denies self predication for things like man, horse, dog, etc. if there are such things
- they are a different kind of being
When viewing the chart: the way columns relate to one another is to be in something and the way
something in a column relates to something underneath it in another row is to be said of
something
Primary substances (a this) cannot be in or said of anything
- they are a direct answer to the question ti esti?’ (what is it?)
- primary substances always belong to secondary substances sort of thing’
- when we talk about man in general we are talking about a this
The distinction between primary and secondary substances is parallel to the distinction between
this and this sort of thing’
Distinction between deduction and demonstration:
PRIOR ANALYTICS: syllogism deduction an argument in which certain things assume
something different from these things being
POSTERIOR ANALYTICS: apodeixis demonstration
www.notesolution.com
Man and everything predicated in common becomes a this sort of thing’ if not then the third
man argument becomes a problem (infinite regress)
Individual man a this
The species man (form or eidos) a this sort of thing’ consists of individual members each of
who have specific characteristics
The cause of being man must itself have those individual properties
Things can be predicated of an individual man, but not from
Non-substance categories are coincidences and can change (quality, quantity, where, etc.)
*what is the proper subject to which any predicate belongs primarily
There is not going to be a walker or pale thing without some substance that is walking or pale,
however there are some things that exist in themselves
73b By universal I mean what belongs to its subject in every case and in its own right, and
insofar as it is itself”
A universal belongs [to a species] whenever it is proved of an instance that is random and
primary”
White is an example of something that can both be in and said of
- said of an individual white
- white in a body
We can predicate qualities, but not what something is
ANIMALS RATIONAL
Rational belongs in itself to animal; you cannot understand what it means to be rational without
understanding it as a feature of an animal.
Homonyms: being called by the same name
Synonyms: have the same definition (subset of homonyms)
DEMONSTRATION vs. DEDUCTION
Demonstration: special kind of deduction where the premises must be prior to the conclusion and
explanatory (must be true)
Deduction: if the premises are true thent he conclusion must be true
Physics II 1-3 192b8
Of beings, some are natural animals, plants, the 4 elements (the 4 elements are primary
substances)
Distinction between form and matter
The thing that is natural has in itself a principle of motion and stability in place (coming to be)
Ex. A bed made of wood the bed itself does not have natures, but the wood itself does
www.notesolution.com

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
Description
PHL200 January-April final exam notes Parmenides: The all is one Platos self critic of his theory of forms with Parmenides and Zeno Plato is subjecting his theory of Forms to criticism 129a eidos (form) of likeness and unlikeness Co-presence of opposites: something can be both like and unlike (eg. tallness and shortness) Tallness itself cannot be both tall and short, therefore, a form cannot have a co-presence of opposites 2 possibilities for the Forms: a) things we can grasp or b) the properties that reside in these things Third Man Argument: 1. One over many assumption if there exists a plurality of F things, then there is some one thing, predicated of all, in virtue of which they are all [called] F 2. Self-predication assumption what is predicated of a plurality of F things is itself F 3. Non-identity assumption what is predicated of a plurality of things is always different from that of which it is predicated 2 major ways in which Plato and Aristotle differ: Metaphysics and Conception of Forms The Forms act as causal accounts for why a person has a certain property (tall, short, beautiful, intelligent, etc.) Aristotles solution to Platos theory of Forms: The Categories The Categories listed in chapter 4: SUBSTANCE: what is it? QUANTITY: how much? QUALITY: what is it like? RELATIVE: double, half, larger WHERE: in the market-place WHEN: yesterday, last year BEING IN A POSITION: is lying, is sitting HAVING: has shoes on ACTING ON: cutting, burning BEING AFFECTED: being cut, being burned The categories are not just words (linguistic) but also ontological (concerned with existence) Example. SAID OF NOT SAID OF (essential) (accidental) IN Knowledge An individual grammatical (non-substance) knowledge NOT IN Man An individual man www.notesolution.com (substance) 2 ways of predication: All of the SAID OF predications are ways of classifying things, whereas IN predications characterize things (what things are like) Differentials: e.g. footed 2 footed, 4 footed - can be used as predications Aristotle believes that neither the name or definition can be predicated - definitions cannot be perceived as the same for all names (e.g. animal being applied to a man vs. a horse) 2 types of distinction: non-substance vs. substance & universals vs. particulars Primary substances cannot exist without secondary substances, they go hand in hand in an important way each of these things meaning secondary substances **Metaphysics 139a [Our distinction between actuality and potentiality explains why universals cannot be substances] For if no substance can be composed of universals (because a universal signifies this sort of thing, not a this) and if no substance can be composed of substances actually present in it, then it follows that every substance will be incomposite, so that none will have any account. nothing that belongs universally is not a substance reflects a change in views from the categories (secondary substance) - contrast between a this and a this sort of thing - it refers to what is predicated in common Aristotle denies self predication for things like man, horse, dog, etc. if there are such things - they are a different kind of being When viewing the chart: the way columns relate to one another is to be in something and the way something in a column relates to something underneath it in another row is to be said of something Primary substances (a this) cannot be in or said of anything - they are a direct answer to the question ti esti? (what is it?) - primary substances always belong to secondary substances sort of thing - when we talk about man in general we are talking about a this The distinction between primary and secondary substances is parallel to the distinction between this and this sort of thing Distinction between deduction and demonstration: PRIOR ANALYTICS: syllogism deduction an argument in which certain things assume something different from these things being POSTERIOR ANALYTICS: apodeixis demonstration www.notesolution.com
More Less
Unlock Document


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

Unlock Document
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version

Unlock Document

Log In


OR

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


OR

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.


Submit