Philosophy Exam Questions Essay

What is Platos possibleness of recollection? What is it about and how does it work?            Platos scheme of recollection states that all knowledge a person has ever cognize or will know already exists in his/her memory. As a result, time and learning atomic number 18 simply illusions they are the process of store e genuinelything. To prove his theory, Plato presents an manakin. It concerns Socrates and a slave. Socrates gives the slave a series of geometrical diagrams and questions, petition him to solve them. The slave does so, without having any mathematical training before. Thus, be bring in the slave was able-bodied to do so, Socrates says that the only he could was because he had prior knowledge in a previous organism and was simply recollecting that knowledge.Plato held that it is better to project inequity than to commit ace. Why? What is Platos theory of justice?          &nb sp Platos theory of justice states that, on an individual level, justice is a homo justness responsible for making a person consistent and good on a social level, justice is what makes a society harmonious and good. Therefore, to suffer an injustice is better, as the person suffering that injustice remains virtuous. The honor stems from maintaining ones values, both as an individual and within society. dissertate Platos view of death. What is the nature of death for Plato, and what, in his view should be the philosophers reaction to the prospect of it? condone.            Platos view of death is presented in the Phaedo, and is of a nonchalant nature. He debates that death is something that should not be feared, as it is the natural course of things to come to life, as well as to die. by means of Socrates, he maintains that one of the goals of practicing ism is to prepare for death. He believes that it frees the soul from the consis tency as much as possible while one is solace alive. Therefore, death is something of a virtue, as it prepares one for having an immortal soul.How does God give itinerary in the views of Descartes and Berkeley?            Both Descartes and Berkeley use the concept of God in their arguments by introducing God as the cause of a persons ideas. However, this is where the parity ends. Descartes states that God is the only possible cause of the idea of God, while subject is the cause of all other ideas. Berkeley states that God is the only possible cause of all ideas. Thus, God is a Divine Mind from which all ideas come.Explain Descartes mode of doubt. What is it and what is its value for philosophical enquiry?            Descartes method of doubt is a philosophical strategy in which the goal is to defeat skepticism. One essential(prenominal) begin by doubting the truth of everything, not just the deduction of the senses or the evidence of culture, plainly the fundamental process of reasoning itself. If a specific truth finish survive this extreme challenge, then it must be all in all true and thus, a certain foundation for knowledge. In regard to its value for philosophical enquiry, this method is much like Socrates method of seeking the truth. It allows one to go by various theories and muddle through various questions in order to seek their own truth.What is Descartes wax example about? How do you think Berkeley would explain the same event?            Descartes believes that the human creative thinker is capable of thought and perception. He explains this concept by way of an example concerning wax. It is evident that solid wax and melted wax are both wax. Therefore, perception is not just a function of the senses, but excessively a reasoning of the understanding. The ultimate conclusion for Descartes, then, is the f act that the mind is the only thing that is definitively in existence. Berkeley would agree with Descartes, as he also believes that the mind is the only mettle that truly exists. For him, the wax in both forms would not be considered an existing entity, as he does not believe that the physical world exists.What is Berkeleys view of the distinction between master(a) and secondary qualities? How does his view differ from Descartes?            Berkeley, upon examining the perception of things, came to the conclusion that any info he has must be considered secondary qualities. Therefore, they are functions of his mind. He rejects the existence of autochthonic qualities, because to him, the mind is the only substance that exists. Descartes says otherwise. He believes that every substance has two types of properties. There is the primary quality, which is the heart of existence then thither is the secondary quality, which focuses on the sen ses. In simple terms, for Berkeley, there is no primary quality for Descartes, there is.Describe Russells criticism of Berkeleys idealism. Do you agree with his criticism? Explain.            When criticizing Berkeleys theory of idealism, Russell examines every aspect and counters for each one even with his own. He points out that Berkeleys initial reasoning concerning sense-data are valid. However, it is from this point on that Russell begins to dispute Berkeley. He points out that the idea of something existence in the mind is a bit difficult to understand, as his inwardness of idea is confusing. In the end, Russell states that the ultimate fallacy of Berkeleys argument is that one can apprehend what is in his or her mind. Finally, Russell states that the nature of knowledge completely refutes Berkeleys argument.            Russells belief that Berkeley is incorrect in stating that ideas ar e of the mind is not completely acceptable. Berkeleys concept is not hard to grasp, as it is in the mind that most ideas develop. Many of the concepts developed within doctrine stem from a simple idea formulated in ones mind. Therefore, Berkeley is partially correct in his belief. However, Russell makes a valid point that if one believes that things only exist in the mind, the ability for man to advance knowledge would be limited. Since one does not want knowledge to be limited in any way, Berkeleys concept of idealism can be dismissed in some regards.According to Russell, what is the point of doing philosophy?            Russell does not provide a point, but rather an aim for doing philosophy. He states that the aim is to achieve knowledge through inquiry and criticism. However, philosophy does not contain certainties like other fields of study do. Yet, according to Russell, it is those very uncertainties that make the study of philosoph y so vital to humanity. Thus, doing philosophy not only helps to find answers to questions about the world around, but it also helps to make unnecessary one inquisitive about that world.