Exam Prep Philosophy PDF

Exam Prep Philosophy Epistemology 1.​ Skepticism. What is it? How does it apply to Epistemology? How does it help codify what we think and know? (Reference the ideas of Descartes, Hume, and Kant) Skepticism in epistemology questions the certainty of knowledge. It pushes us to doubt wh...

Exam Prep Philosophy Epistemology 1.​ Skepticism. What is it? How does it apply to Epistemology? How does it help codify what we think and know? (Reference the ideas of Descartes, Hume, and Kant) Skepticism in epistemology questions the certainty of knowledge. It pushes us to doubt what we think we know and examine our beliefs more closely. Descartes used skepticism to arrive at his famous conclusion, “I think, therefore I am.” Hume took it further by questioning causality, showing the limits of human reasoning. Kant combined skepticism by saying knowledge comes from both experience and reason but is always within human limits. Skepticism helps us carefully test and refine what we think we know, making it a key tool in understanding knowledge. Moral, Social, and Political Philosophy 2.​ What is the good life? (Reference: Aristotle’s Virtue Ethics, hedonism, success, asceticism, freedom, and religion) The Good Life refers to a life that is fulfilling and well-lived. According to Aristotle’s Virtue Ethics, the good life is achieved by practicing virtues and character traits that lead to happiness and excellence. Hedonism defines the good life as maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain. Success views the good life in terms of achieving personal goals and accomplishments. Asceticism believes the good life comes through self-discipline and denying worldly pleasures. Freedom sees the good life as having autonomy and making choices according to one’s values. Religion often ties the good life to living by divine guidance and moral commandments. Each of these perspectives offers different ways to understand what it means to live well, depending on one’s values and beliefs. Logical Fallacies 1.​ The Strawman: Misrepresenting someone’s argument to make it easier to attack. 2.​ Special Pleading: Making exceptions or excuses for your argument while demanding others be held to strict standards.  3.​ Gambler’s Fallacy: Believing that past random events will affect future outcomes. 4.​ Ad Hominem: Attacking someone’s character instead of addressing their argument. 5.​ Loaded Question: Asking a question that has an assumption built into it. 6.​ Bandwagon: Believing something because everyone else does. 7.​ Appeal to Authority: Relying on the opinion of an authority figure instead of logical evidence. 8.​ Appeal to Emotion: Using emotions to distract from the argument’s actual merit. 9.​ Tu Quoque: Avoiding criticism by turning it back on the accuser. 10.​Burden of Proof: Shifting the responsibility of proving an argument to someone else. 11.​Argument from Incredulity: Claiming something is false because you can’t imagine it being true. 12.​Ambiguity: Using vague language that can have multiple interpretations to mislead. To write an invalid deductive form, ensure your argument follows these key principles: 1.​ Start with clear, well-defined premises that support your argument. 2.​ Avoid fallacies such as strawman, ad hominem, loaded questions, or appeals to emotion. 3.​ Ensure the argument flows logically the conclusion must follow necessarily from the premises, like invalid deductive reasoning. 4.​ Avoid ambiguity be clear and precise in your wording to prevent misinterpretation