Introduction To Philosophy Final Exam From Each Section Belo

Introduction To Philosophyfinal Exam From Each Section Below Choose

Introduction to Philosophy Final Exam: · From each section below choose 1 question to answer. In your answer, please make it clear which questions you’ve chosen. · All answers are to be submitted as a word document (or equivalent). PDFs will not be accepted. · All answers are to be written in point 12 font, double-spaced with standard margins. · Exams are to be submitted to me via email no later than 5/4 (end of day). Section I: Descartes (Answers for this section should be no less than 1 double-spaced page/aprox 260 words). 1. Why is Descartes unable to doubt his own existence, and what does he mean when he says, “I think therefore I am”? 2. In Meditation III, Descartes notes that ideas have 3 origins. Name them, and explain why he thinks the Idea of God belongs to the category of “innate” ideas. 3. Descartes is a Rationalist. Explain what this means with regard to his opinions on knowledge, reason, and certainty. Section II: Hume (Answers for this section should be no less than 1 double-spaced page/aprox 260 words). 1. Explain Hume’s notion of “Impressions” and “Ideas”. Give an example of each, and explain why he thinks one must always come before the other. 2. In Hume’s dialogue on religion, the Character Philo is skeptical of Cleanthes’ argument for the existence of God. Explain 2 problems that Philo finds with Cleanthes’ argument. 3. What does Hume mean when he says that the “self” does not actually exist, and is merely an issue of grammar? Section III: Rorty (Answers for this section should be no less than 1 double-spaced page/aprox 260 words). 1. Explain the difference between the “Realist” approach to truth and knowledge vs. the “Pragmatist” approach to those same issues. Extra Credit: (Answers for this section are up to you regarding length). 1. In as much detail as possible, explain Kant’s definition of Enlightenment.

Paper For Above instruction

Introduction to Philosophy involves engaging deeply with fundamental questions about knowledge, existence, reality, and ethics by examining key figures and their ideas. This essay will explore significant philosophical topics from Descartes, Hume, and Rorty, providing insight into their contributions and perspectives on truth, certainty, and reality. Each section discusses critical concepts: Descartes' certainty of self-awareness, Hume’s understanding of impressions and ideas, and Rorty’s contrasting views on truth and knowledge.

Descartes: Doubt and Rationalism

René Descartes, often considered the father of modern philosophy, famously declared cogito ergo sum—“I think, therefore I am”—as an undeniable foundation for knowledge. Descartes’ inability to doubt his own existence stems from his recognition that the very act of doubting or thinking confirms his existence. He argues that even if an evil demon were deceiving him, there must be a thinking subject to be deceived. This self-awareness becomes the bedrock of certainty in his epistemology. The statement “I think therefore I am” encapsulates the idea that thought is the proof of existence; it is the indubitable truth upon which all knowledge can be built.

In Meditation III, Descartes identifies three sources of ideas: innate ideas, adventitious ideas, and caused or manufactured ideas. Innate ideas are those inherently present in the mind; they are not derived from experience but are built into our rational nature. He regards the idea of God as innate because it is a perfect, infinite being that the human mind inherently recognizes as part of its rational structure. Descartes believes that innate ideas like the concept of God help us comprehend truths that are self-evident and universally accessible, reflecting the rationalist conviction that reason has a foundational role in acquiring knowledge.

As a Rationalist, Descartes emphasizes reason as the primary source of knowledge over sensory experience. Rationalists hold that some truths are known a priori—that is, independent of experience—through innate ideas and deductive reasoning. Descartes seeks certainty in knowledge, which he believes can only be achieved through clear and distinct perceptions, attainable by reason alone. This approach contrasts with empiricism, which asserts that knowledge derives from sensory experience. For Descartes, the certainty of reason provides the most secure foundation for building scientific and philosophical knowledge.

Hume: Impressions, Ideas, and Skepticism

David Hume’s philosophy introduces a distinction between “impressions” and “ideas.” Impressions are lively, forceful perceptions derived from direct sensory experience, such as the vivid sensation of heat from a fire or the pain of a headache. Ideas, on the other hand, are less vivid, derived from impressions, and represent mental reproductions of previous impressions—things like the memory of a fire’s warmth or the thought of pain. Hume emphasizes that impressions always come before ideas because all ideas ultimately originate from prior sensory experiences. For example, the idea of a gold mountain is formed from impressions of gold and mountainous terrain experienced through the senses.

Hume’s skepticism about religious arguments is exemplified in the character Philo’s critique of Cleanthes’ design argument for the existence of God. First, Philo questions the analogy between human creation and divine creation, arguing that the complexity and order observed in nature do not necessarily imply a divine Craftsman but could result from natural laws or chance. Second, he raises the problem of the problem of induction: just because observed effects have natural causes in the past does not guarantee they do so in the future, undermining arguments that infer divine existence from natural phenomena.

Hume also contends that the “self” is an illusion; there is no fixed, unchanging “self” underlying our perceptions. Instead, what we call the “self” is a bundle of perceptions—constant, fleeting impressions and ideas—lacking any core substance. Hume suggests that the notion of a persistent self is a useful fiction, a grammatical convenience to describe our experience, but it does not correspond to an actual, enduring entity.

Rorty: Realism vs. Pragmatism

Richard Rorty challenges traditional views of truth and knowledge by advocating a pragmatic approach. The “Realist” approach holds that there exists an objective, mind-independent reality of which our statements about the world are true representations. Realists believe that truth corresponds to how well our beliefs or theories match this independent reality, which can be discovered through empirical investigation and rational inquiry.

In contrast, Rorty’s “Pragmatist” approach denies the notion of an ultimate, absolute truth. Instead, he argues that truth is a property of our language and practices—what works effectively within specific historical and cultural contexts. For Rorty, beliefs are justified not by correspondence to an external reality but by their usefulness, coherence within a worldview, and ability to serve human purposes. This perspective encourages a flexible, anti-essentialist view of knowledge that emphasizes human practical engagement over the pursuit of absolute certainty, thus redefining the goals of philosophy as a tool for navigating our traditions and practices.

Extra Credit: Kant’s Enlightenment

Immanuel Kant’s concept of Enlightenment is central to his philosophy and can be defined as the process by which individuals free themselves from self-incurred immaturity—the inability to use one’s reason without guidance—from external authorities or dogmas. Kant famously characterizes enlightenment as “man's emergence from his self-imposed immaturity,” achieved through the courageous and independent use of reason. He advocates for critical thinking, skepticism of dogma, and the importance of public reason in fostering autonomous, rational individuals capable of guiding their moral and intellectual development. Kant’s emphasis on reason as a tool for moral progress underscores his vision of enlightenment as an ongoing, active process that encourages individual autonomy and societal progress.

References

• Cottingham, J. (1996). Descartes. Oxford University Press.
• Hume, D. (1739/2000). An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding. Oxford University Press.
• Rorty, R. (1980). Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature. Princeton University Press.
• Kant, I. (1784). What is Enlightenment? In Practical Philosophy. Cambridge University Press.
• Nadler, S. (2004). Descartes and the Rationalists. Cambridge University Press.
• Averill, J. R. (2014). Hume: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press.
• Brandom, R. (1994). Making It Explicit: Reasoning, Representing, and Discursive Commitment. Harvard University Press.
• Schmitz, C. (2017). Rorty’s Pragmatism. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
• Kant, I. (1781). Critique of Pure Reason. Cambridge University Press.
• Ben-Menahem, A. (2011). Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason. Routledge.