As announced on the syllabus, we’ll have the first exam in our course (of two) next Wednesday, February 28, at the beginning of our regular class meeting. The format will mostly be multiple-choice, possibly also with some short answers. We expect that well-prepared students will be able to read and complete the exam in about 12 minutes; but in order that you not be rushed, we will allow you to work on the exam until 9:30. If you’re able to and wish to come to class a bit earlier, to get an early start, you may also do that. At 9:30 all exams will be collected and we’ll continue with a lecture introducing our next course topic.
The exam will only be offered in-class, not online. No laptops, phones, or books may be consulted while you’re taking the exam. You are however allowed to consult your own study sheet, which must be a single piece of paper with writing or printing of any size (and it may cover both sides of the paper). If you use a study sheet, you must have prepared it yourself, and must submit it along with your completed exam.
If you’re unable to attend class the day of the exam, and make arrangements with us in advance, then instead of taking the exam, you may instead write a 300-500 word short essay on one of these following questions as a substitute:
- Prompt 1: Explain the connection between Leibniz’s Law and sentences like “I think that Superman is very strong, and I think that Clark Kent is not very strong,” said by someone who is unaware that Clark Kent and Superman are one and the same.
- Prompt 2: Explain the difference between epiphenomenalism and interactionist dualism. Why might someone prefer one of these views (pick your favorite) over the other?
The target length for these essays is 300-500 words. They should be submitted in Canvas by Friday March 1 at 11:59 pm, and no assistance from AI tools or other people is permitted for it. If you want to do this substitute for the exam, you must confirm your intention to do so with us in advance. You can’t come look at the exam and then decide, or decide to do the substitute just because you overslept. If you become ill suddenly, email us the night before or morning of the exam to let us know.
Students with ARS accommodations, we will contact you directly to coordinate.
The rest of this document provides three things. First, there are instructions about how you’ll be scored for the multiple choice questions. Second, there are some sample questions so you see the kind of thing that will be on the exam. Third, there is a list of main topics you can review, that have been introduced in lectures, in the notes on our course website, and/or in our readings.
1. How You’ll Be Scored
For each multiple choice question, you can elect to skip it; or choose one of the answers; or choose two of the answers, designating one of them as your “top” answer and the other as your “fallback” answer. (If you choose two answers and it’s not clear which is your “top” choice, we’ll treat them both as “fallbacks.” If you choose more than two answers, we’ll treat the question as one you skipped.)
If you selected no choices/skipped the question, you get 0 points for it.
If you selected one choice, and you’re correct, you get +6 points. But if you’re wrong, you get -2 points.
If you selected two choices, and your “top” choice is correct, you get +5 points. If your “fallback” choice is the one that’s correct, you get +3 points. If neither of your choices is correct, you get -4 points.
If you want to keep things simple, you can of course just always choose one option.
With this scoring system, the best possible result (if you make only a single selection for each question, and get them all correct) will be +48 points. If you make two selections for each question, and your “top” answer is always correct, your score will be +40 points. We will be curving the exam scores, and we’ll make sure that +40 points still comes out to be an A minus. If you skip all the questions, your result will be 0 points. If you answer every question, but get them all wrong, your result will be either -16 or -32 points (depending on whether you made one wrong choice per question or two). We don’t yet know what the curve will look like, but you can safely assume that scores of 0 and worse will not be passing.
If you just randomly guess at answers, you could potentially get any score, but the expected result would be 0.
2. Sample Questions
A “reductio” is…
- An argument by reduction to the most basic principles
- An argument by reduction to a single premise
- An argument by reduction to a better argument
- An argument by reduction to an absurd or unacceptable conclusion
All of the following argument patterns are “valid” except:
- P. Therefore, P.
- If P, then Q. P. Therefore, Q.
- If P, then Q. Q. Therefore, P.
- Either P or Q. Not Q. Therefore, P.
“Ockham’s Razor” is…
- The principle that simpler explanations should be preferred over more complicated ones
- The principle that philosophers should never shave
- The principle that everything is ultimately explained by the will of God
- The principle that only non-physical things are capable of thought
A mistake at the US Mint causes two one-dollar bills to be stamped with the exact same serial number at the exact same time. The two bills are thus:
- Numerically identical
- Conceptually different but metaphysically the same
- Not identical in any sense
- Qualitatively identical
3. Review Topics
This list is meant to summarize the notions, theories, and arguments discussed in the first third of the class (up until the exam). Some of the topics near the end won’t be introduced until today or this coming Monday. To prepare for the exam, be sure you know what each of the following mean, and what bearing they have on the issues we discussed in class.
- Premises, Conclusion
- Deductively “valid” argument, “Sound” argument, Persuasive argument
- Sufficient condition, Necessary condition
- Antecedent and Consequent of a conditional
- Difference between the Converse and the Contrapositive of a conditional
- Biconditional, “if and only if” (Iff)
- A practical test or evidence to believe X is present (epistemology of X) versus a “unpacking definition” or analysis of what we already understand by X (the metaphysics or nature of X) versus a stipulative definition of X
- Questions about the causes/mechanisms that bring X about, versus Questions about what defines or constitutes X
- Contrast between what’s part of the definition of some notion (for example, “substance”) and contentious claims about that notion
- What is a counter-example? What is a thought-experiment? Why are science fiction thought-experiments relevant to philosophy?
- Notion of “question-begging” arguments (as philosophers use this label)
- Equivocating
- Dilemma
- Reductio
- Proving something with certainty versus having reasonable grounds for believing it
- Something’s being necessary for having mentality versus it’s sufficing for/guaranteeing the presence of mentality versus its making it reasonable to attribute mentality
- Evidence for mentality from physical makeup/structure versus from non-verbal behavior (such as learning/solving problems) versus from use of language
- What is a “mental state”? What is the difference or relation between a mental state and a mind?
- Ways in which our access to our own mental states is claimed to be “special” or “privileged”
- Representational states/intentionality
- Propositional or intentional or representational attitudes
- Phenomenal or qualitative “feels,” sensations
- Ethics, epistemology, metaphysics/ontology
- Concrete individuals, versus Events/states/processes, versus Properties/Relations, versus Facts and Propositions
- Substances versus “Derivative or dependent objects” like smiles, wits, waves, hikes, dances
- Debate between (substance) dualists about the mind/body relation and materialists/physicalists
- Mind versus soul, which can a materialist believe in?
- Being a materialist but denying that “your mind” is any substance
- Leibniz’s Law (also called “the indiscernibility of identicals”)
- Does Leibniz’s Law say that if X and Y have all the same properties, they are one and the same thing?
- Intrinsic versus extrinsic/relational properties
- Qualitative identity (being copies or duplicates of each other, at least at a given moment) versus Numerical identity (being one and the same thing)
- the “divisibility argument” for dualism
- “I know that reporter is alive right now. I don’t know whether Superman is still alive. Hence that reporter is not one and the same as Superman.”
- “I have no doubts about my mind’s existence. I do have doubts about whether my body really exists. Hence my mind is not one and the same as my body.”
- the “continuity of nature” argument against dualism
- Interactionism
- Epiphenomenalism
- What Huxley means by saying animals are “conscious automata”
- van Inwagen’s “remote control” argument against dualism
- the complaint that dualist interactionists have no good story about how causal influences “jump the gap” from the soul into the physical world (Princess Elisabeth)
- the “Pairing Problem” for dualist interactionists
- What does the slogan “Physical events are causally closed” mean?
- the relations between “causal determinism” and the notion of “overcausing” (sometimes called “causal overdetermination”)
- Why is it unattractive/implausible to say there’s “overcausing” everytime something mental causes a physical effect?
- Ockham’s Razor