What are your critical thoughts regarding these theories of knowledge
Compare, contrast, and critically evaluate the theory of knowledge viewpoints of two or more of the following philosophical figures listed below. What are your critical thoughts regarding these theories of knowledge? How well do you think it or they succeed? Or, do not succeed? Why? Explain and defend your answer. (You may answer this question twice):
Plato/Socrates
Aristotle
Augustine
Anselm
Aquinas
Hobbes
Sextus Empiricus (Pyhrronism)
Descartes
Locke
Berkeley
Hume
Reid
What is the base-line Socratic-Platonic theory of knowledge, taking into account at least some of the key notions listed below: How well do you think this base-line theory either succeeds or does not succeed? Why? Explain and defend your answer.
The Divided Line
Becoming v. Being
Ideal Forms
Participation
Anamnesis or Recollection
The Myth of the Cave, and the Analogy of the Sun
Virtue
Contemplation of the Form of the Good
What is the basic Aristotelian theory of knowledge, taking into account at least some of the key notions listed below: What are your critical thoughts regarding this Aristotelian epistemic viewpoint? How well do you think it succeeds? Or, does not succeed? Why? Explain and defend your answer.
Aristotle’s “method” of the “sciences” (knowledge)
Induction by enumeration
Induction by insight
Aristotle’s conception or theory of the four causes
The syllogism
The square of opposition
Universal and particular truths
Aristotelian method and necessity; scientific First Principles as necessary truth
Essential v. accidental attributes in Aristotle
Hylomorphism / hylomorphic theory
Species
Natural Kinds
Teleology
Form & Matter
What is the essential Pyrrhonist (Sextus Empiricus) critique of any non-skeptical, positive theory of knowledge, taking into account at least some of the notions listed below: What are your critical thoughts regarding this negative argument? How well do you think it succeeds? Or, does not succeed? Why? Explain and defend your answer.
Diallelus (the wheel) argument
The Problem of the Criterion
Academic Skepticism
Pyrrhonian Skepticism
Dogmatism
Appearance v. Reality
Ataraxia
Tropes
Ten Modes
What are the fundamentals of Descartes’ theory of knowledge as developed in his Meditations on First Philosophy and Principles of Philosophy — taking into account at least some of the notions listed below: What are your critical thoughts regarding this epistemic viewpoint? How well do you think it succeeds? Or, does not succeed? Why? Explain and defend your answer.
Method of Doubt
Three Stages of Doubt
The Cogito
Essence of Thinking Substance
Essence of Physical Substance
Hardly Perceptible & Far/Distant Objects Hypothesis
Dream Hypothesis
Evil Demon Hypothesis
Clear & Distinct Ideas
God as Infinite and Perfect Substance
Formal Reality v. Objective Reality
The Cartesian Circle
Dualism
The Mind-Body Problem
In the Meditations . . . , Descartes presents a number of skeptical possibilities that he thinks illustrate that our beliefs about the world derived from perception lack absolute certainty. What are these skeptical possibilities? Do you think Descartes is right in his view that we do not know with absolute certainty anything about the external, non-subjective world purely on the basis of perception? Why or why not? Do the philosophical views of other authors investigated this semester (so far), in addition to Descartes, shed light on this question? Explain and defend your answer.
Descartes admits that he could be wrong when he thinks he sees a light, hears a noise, or feels heat. However, he says he could not possibly be mistaken if he believes that he seems to see a light, hear a noise, or feel heat. Is he correct about this? Why or why not? Do the philosophical views of other authors investigated this semester (so far), in addition to Descartes, shed light on this question? Explain and defend your answer.
What is Descartes trying to show with his example of the piece of wax, near the end of the “Second Meditation?” Do you agree with the lesson he attempts to draw from the piece of wax? Why or why not? Do the philosophical views of other authors investigated this semester (so far), in addition to Descartes, shed light on this question? Explain and defend your answer.
In the “Meditations . . .” what finally is Descartes’ answer to skepticism? Explain. In your view is Descartes’ answer correct in/on this matter? Why or why not? Do the philosophical views of other authors investigated this semester (so far), in addition to Descartes, shed light on this question? Explain and defend your answer.
In the Meditations . . . what finally is Descartes’ answer to solipsism? Explain. In your view is Descartes’ answer correct in/on this matter? Why or why not? Do the philosophical views of other authors investigated this semester (so far), in addition to Descartes, shed light on this question? Explain and defend your answer.
What is meant by the Cartesian “circle”? Explain. Does this alleged philosophical problem ultimately defeat the Cartesian project? Why or why not? Do the philosophical views of other authors investigated this semester (so far) in addition to Descartes, shed light on this question? Explain and defend your answer.
Why is Descartes called a “dualist”? What is his theory or viewpoint regarding the relationship between mental entities and physical things? What is his theory or viewpoint of substance? How are Descartes’ philosophical viewpoints related to what is sometimes called the “mind-body” problem? Explain. Does the alleged philosophical issue of dualism ultimately defeat the Cartesian project? Why or why not? Do the philosophical views of other authors investigated this semester (so far), in addition to Descartes, shed light on this question? Explain and defend your answer.
What are the basic skeptical arguments laid out by David Hume (discussed by Palmer, etc.) concerning our alleged knowledge of the external world, as well as, our knowledge of causation and necessary connection? What are your critical thoughts regarding such arguments? How well do you think these arguments either succeed or not succeed? In your view, are these arguments cogent? Why or why not? Do the philosophical views of other authors investigated this semester (so far), in addition to David Hume, shed light on this question? Explain and defend your answer.
What was Immanuel Kant’s basic answer to Hume’s skeptical claims? How did Hume’s writings, according to Kant, “rouse him out of his dogmatic slumber?” Does Kant’s regulative “rationalism-empiricism” solve or resolve issues introduced by Hume’s thoughts concerning and alleged analysis of causation? Why or why not? Explain and defend your answer.
What is R. M. Chrisolm’s basic point (or points) in his article, “The Problem of the Criteria?” Do you agree or disagree with these points. Do the philosophical views of other authors investigated this semester (so far), in addition to Chrisolm, shed light on this question? Explain and defend your answer.
What is the basic line of argument laid out in Lewis Carrol’s short article (or monogram) “What Achilles said to the Tortoise?” What are your critical thoughts regarding such a line of argument? In your view, is this line of reasoning cogent? If so, why? And, if not so, why? Do the philosophical views of other authors investigated this semester shed light on this question? Explain and defend your answer.
What is the basic line of argument laid out in Edmund Gettier’s short article, Is Justified True Belief Knowledge?” What are your critical thoughts regarding such a line of argument? In your view, is this line of reasoning cogent? If so, why? And, if not so, why? Do the philosophical views of other authors investigated this semester shed light on this question? Explain and defend your answer.
You may answer any of the questions from Palmer’s Does the Center Hold? – pp. 72 & 110 that you did not answer on your previous drop box assignment, or any of the questions from Palmer’s Looking at Philosophy, the Unbearable Heaviness Made Light under the “Topics for Consideration” headline.
Solution preview for the order on what are your critical thoughts regarding these theories of knowledge
APA
1960 words