PHIL 4150: Analytic Philosophy

University of West Georgia

Spring 2009

Date: Friday May 1 (11am - 1pm)

This test will be worth 30% of your total course grade. This is a timed test; you will have two hours to complete the test.

You are required to provide your own blue book for the test. Blue books are small notebooks designed especially for writing tests. They are available from the UWG Bookstore and at the cart in the atrium of the TLC.

Do not write your name on your bluebook; identify yourself only with your student number.

Do not tear any pages out of your bluebook before or during the test.

See my online test archive for examples of past tests in this course:

http://www.westga.edu/~rlane/testArchive/testarchive.html

Section I will consist of definitions [10% of total test grade]. I will give you a short list of terms and phrases to define. Typically, only a sentence or two is necessary for a satisfactory answer. The terms and phrases will come from the following list:

1. logical atomism
2. logical positivism
3. “Über Sinn und Bedeutung” [state English translation of title, author, year, and something about contents]
4. logicism
5. a posteriori
6. a priori
7. relation
8. definite description
9. proposition
10. Principle of Substitutivity
11. propositional attitude
12. correspondence theory of truth
13. redundancy theory of truth
14. “On Denoting” [state author, year, and something about contents]
15. Law of Excluded Middle
16. Principle of Bivalence
17. Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus [state author, year, and something about contents]
18. Philosophical Investigations [state author, year, and something about contents]
19. ostensive definition

20. metaphysics
21. ontology
22. logical positivism
23. the Verification Principle
24. empirical
25. “The Elimination of Metaphysics through the Logical Analysis of Language” [state author, year, and something about contents]
26. Law of Non-Contradiction
27. Law of Excluded Middle
28. falsificationism
29. “Two Dogmas of Empiricism” [state author, year, and something about contents]
30. “On What There Is” [state author, year, and something about contents]
31. Ockham’s razor
32. identity conditions
33. a “taste for desert landscapes” [who said it, and what does it mean?]
34. “no entity without identity” [who said it, and what does it mean?]
35. realism [in the sense in which it is opposed to nominalism]
36. nominalism
37. conceptual scheme
38. hypostasis
39. reductio ad absurdum

40. epistemic certainty
41. psychological certainty
42. fallibilism
43. skepticism
44. idealism
45. “A Defense of Common Sense” [state author, year, and something about contents]
46. direct realism
47. indirect realism
48. “Is Knowledge Justified True Belief?” [state author, year, and something about contents]
49. open texture
50. normative
51. descriptive
52. normative ethics
53. applied ethics
54. meta-ethics
55. Principia Ethica [state author, year, and something about contents]
56. casuistry
57. utilitarianism
58. consequentialism
59. “The Emotive Meaning of Ethical Terms” [state author, year, and something about contents]
60. moral nihilism

Your definitions should as be as detailed, clear and precise as possible. For example, the following is not an adequate definition of the term "a priori": "independent of experience." This would get you partial credit, but not full credit. A much better definition is this: "An a priori statement is one that can be known to be true or false independent of sense experience, for example, ‘All bachelors are unmarried’ and ‘Triangles have three sides.’"

Section II will consist of short answer questions [30% of total test grade]. Your answers to these questions should be as detailed, clear and precise as possible. Typically, a paragraph of about five to seven sentences is sufficient for a satisfactory answer. The questions will be drawn from the following list:

1. Explain the use/mention distinction, giving examples to illustrate it.
2. Define both qualitative identity and numerical identity, and give examples to illustrate the difference between them.
3. Explain and give examples to illustrate the difference between extensional contexts and intensional contexts, as that difference is understood by contemporary philosophers.
4. Explain the three “realms” described by Frege.
5. Explain the later Wittgenstein’s quietist idea of philosophy as therapy.

6. Explain Kant’s distinctions among analytic and synthetic judgments and a priori and a posteriori judgments. What four possible categories of judgment do these distinctions yield, and what types of judgment occur in each category, according to Kant?
7. Explain how the Logical Positivists (including Carnap) categorized various types of statement.
8. Explain what Quine means by “semantic ascent” and illustrate with at least one example.
9. Explain the three claims that combine to make up Realism (in the sense of “Realism” in which it is opposed by anti-Realism).

10. Explain and give examples of the three ways in which we use the word “knowledge.”
11. Describe at least three different ways in which the relationship between science and knowledge can be conceived.
12. State the JTB Theory of Knowledge and explain one of the counterexamples that Gettier gave to show that it is inadequate.

Section III will consist of one discussion question. [30% of total test grade].

You will be given three questions and allowed to choose one to answer. Your answers should be as detailed, clear and precise as time allows. In other words, tell me everything you know about the question asked. If you omit something that is relevant to the question, I will assume that you do not know the material you are omitting.

1. Explain EITHER (A) Frege’s Puzzle About Identity, his original (1879) solution, and his later (1892) solution, OR (B) his attitude towards truth, including, at minimum, the theory of truth that he criticizes, how he criticizes it, and what positive things he has to say about truth.

2. Discuss Russell’s theory of descriptions and at least two of the puzzles Russell intended it to solve (including how it is supposed to solve those two puzzles).

3. Discuss EITHER (A) the early Wittgenstein’s metaphysics and his picture theory of meaning OR (B) the later Wittgenstein’s rejection of the picture theory of meaning and the ideas about meaning with which he replaced that theory.

4. Discuss Carnap’s 1932 account of meaning and how he used that account in his criticism of metaphysics.

5. Discuss EITHER (A) Quine’s approach to “the problem of non-being” (a.k.a. “Plato’s beard”), including his criticism of alternative approaches, OR (B) his doctrine of the inscrutability of reference and how he illustrates that doctrine with his example of “radical translation.”

Section IV will consist of one discussion question. [30% of total test grade].

You will be given two questions and allowed to choose one to answer. Your answer should be as detailed, clear and precise as time allows. In other words, tell me everything you know about the question asked. If you omit something that is relevant to the question, I will assume that you do not know the material you are omitting.

1. Discuss EITHER (A) Moore’s claim that there are common-sense beliefs about which we can be absolutely certain and his defense of that claim against metaphysical and epistemological objections, OR (B) his views on sense data and theories of perception.

2. Discuss Moore’s account of goodness, including the Naturalistic Fallacy, the Open Question Argument, intuitionism, and associated ideas.

3. Discuss Stevenson’s account of goodness, including the three restrictions he believes any such account must meet, his distinctions among various types of meaning and use, and the theory he believes meets the three restrictions.

I recommend that, in studying for sections three and four, you practice composing essays that explain the arguments and other moral considerations relevant to each issue and that incorporate relevant facts (from the lecture notes and/or the textbook) where appropriate.

I expect that you will spend at least 30 minutes on each essay during the two hours you will have to take the test. I realize that, for some essay questions on this study guide, we may have covered more material than you can address in that length of time. So in preparing for the test, you should select which arguments, moral issues, and relevant facts you plan to discuss while writing your answers. It is unwise to study by simply reading through the lecture notes and textbook again and again and then to attempt to compose an essay “on the fly,” while taking the test. In preparing to take the test, you should, at the very least, construct an outline of each of the essays you may be asked to write. I recommend that you go beyond simply constructing outlines and actually practice writing your essays as much as possible while preparing for the test.