Philosophy Past Paper - Free Will and Responsibility

I. "FREE WILL" What does Nagel mean by free will? How is it connected to the concepts of moral responsibility and autonomy? - - - What is determinism? How does determinism threaten the notion of free will? -Determinism is the idea that every event, including human actions, is determin...

I. "FREE WILL" What does Nagel mean by free will? How is it connected to the concepts of moral responsibility and autonomy? - - - What is determinism? How does determinism threaten the notion of free will? -Determinism is the idea that every event, including human actions, is determined by previous events according to natural laws. In other words, everything that happens is the result of a chain of prior occurrences, and nothing happens randomly or by chance. -Determinism threatens the notion of free will because if our actions are predetermined by past events, then it seems like we don\'t have the ability to choose freely. If all our decisions are just the inevitable result of previous causes, it raises the question of whether we can truly be responsible for our actions. This creates a conflict between the idea of free will and the deterministic view of the universe. Be able to explain the following terms: Libertarianism, hard determinism, compatibilism. 1\. Libertarianism: This is the belief that we have free will and our actions are not determined by past events. We can make genuine choices. 2\. Hard Determinism: This view says that all events, including human actions, are determined by previous events. Therefore, free will doesn\'t exist. 3\. Compatibilism: This idea tries to bridge the gap by saying that free will and determinism can both be true. Even if our actions are determined, we can still be considered free if we act according to our desires and intentions. II\. "ALTERNATE POSSIBILITIES AND MORAL RESPONSIBILITY" What is the principle of alternative possibilities and how might it pose problems for compatibilism? The principle of alternative possibilities means a person is only responsible for their actions if they had the option to do something else. Basically, they must have been able to make a different choice. This poses problems for compatibilism because compatibilism says that even if our actions are determined, we can still have free will. But if everything is determined, it seems like we can\'t really have alternative possibilities, which makes it hard to say we\'re truly responsible for our actions. Be able to explain Frankfurt\'s critique of the principle of alternative possibilities in terms of the example of Jones4. Frankfurt\'s critique of the principle of alternative possibilities uses the example of Jones4 to show that someone can be responsible for their actions even if they couldn\'t have done otherwise. In the example, Jones decides to do something on his own. But if he didn\'t decide to do it, someone else would have forced him to do it anyway. Even though he couldn\'t have done otherwise, he\'s still responsible because he made the choice himself. This shows that you can be responsible even if you don\'t have alternative possibilities. What is the "flicker of freedom," and how might it be a problem for Frankfurt's argument? The \"flicker of freedom\" is like a tiny moment where you could\'ve made a different choice, even if most options are taken away. It challenges Frankfurt\'s idea because if there\'s even a little chance to choose differently, it might mean you still have some responsibility for your actions. So, it kinda complicates his argument! III\. THE CONCEPT OF MIND What is the \"official doctrine\" on the relationship between the mind and the body? What two problems does Ryle identify with it? The \"official doctrine\" is basically the idea that the mind and body are two separate things---like the mind is non-physical and the body is physical. 1\. Category Mistake: He says it\'s a mistake to think of the mind as a separate thing because it\'s really just about how the body works. 2\. Interaction Problem: If they\'re totally different, it's confusing how they can affect each other. Like, how can a non-physical mind make a physical body do stuff? Be able to explain what a category mistake is with examples. How does the official doctrine commit this mistake? Treating something in one category as if it were a member of another. Example: "I know that this is the left glove and this is the right, but where is the pair?" This treats the pair as if it is an additional concrete thing separable from the individual gloves. Understand how Ryle analyzes mental states in terms of behaviors and behavioral dispositions. Ryle looks at mental states by focusing on behaviors and how people act. Instead of thinking of thoughts or feelings as hidden inside someone, he says they show up in what people do. For example, if someone believes it's going to rain, they might carry an umbrella or check the weather. That belief is seen in their actions. He also talks about \"dispositions,\" which are like habits or tendencies. If someone is called \"friendly,\" it means they usually act in a friendly way, like smiling or chatting with others. So, Ryle believes we should understand mental states by watching how people behave instead of thinking of them as separate, hidden things. IV\. "EPIPHENOMENAL QUALIA" What is epiphenomenalism? How does it contrast with physicalism and interactionist dualism (which is identical w/ the \"official doctrine\")? -Epiphenomenalism is the idea that mental events are caused by physical events in the brain but have no effects on physical events. Think of it like a shadow that moves with you but can\'t change anything. -Physicalism is the belief that everything about the mind can be explained by physical processes in the brain. According to physicalism, mental states are just brain states. -Interactionist Dualism (or the \"official doctrine\") says that the mind and body are separate but can affect each other. The mind can cause physical actions, and physical events can cause mental experiences. - Be able to explain Frank Jackson\'s knowledge argument against physicalism in terms of the scenario of Mary the Color Scientist. So, Frank Jackson\'s knowledge argument uses the story of Mary the Color Scientist to challenge physicalism. Mary knows everything about color scientifically but has lived in a black-and-white room. When she finally sees color for the first time, she learns something new about what it\'s like to experience color. This shows that even if you know all the physical facts, there\'s still something missing---those personal experiences (qualia). Jackson argues that this means physicalism doesn\'t explain everything about the mind, highlighting that there\'s more to it than just physical processes. V. "BLOOD AND BEAUTY" Be able to explain the anatomy of taste. The antinomy of taste refers to the conflict between subjective and objective views on taste. On one hand, taste is deeply personal and subjective, meaning that individual preferences can vary widely. What one person finds delicious, another might find unappetizing. On the other hand, there are objective standards in taste, often influenced by cultural norms, culinary techniques, and even scientific understanding of flavor combinations. This creates a tension between personal experience and shared standards in the appreciation of food and flavors. This antinomy highlights the complexity of taste as both an individual experience and a cultural phenomenon, where personal likes and dislikes can clash with broader societal expectations or aesthetic judgments. How does Hume resolve the antinomy of taste? Know some of the characteristics of Hume associates with \"experts\" in matters of aesthetic judgment. Hume tackles the antinomy of taste by saying that while taste is personal, we can still find a standard for judging art. He talks about \"true judges\" or experts who have some key traits: 1\. Delicate Taste: They notice small details in art. 2\. Experience: They\'ve looked at a lot of art, so they know what to look for. 3\. Comparison Skills: They can compare different artworks well. 4\. Open Mind: They don\'t let personal biases affect their judgment. 5\. Good Sense: They understand the principles of art and beauty. What does Kant mean when he says that aesthetic judgment must be disinterested? When Kant says that aesthetic judgment must be disinterested, he means that it should be made without any personal bias, desires, or practical interests. In other words, when you judge something aesthetically, you should appreciate it for its own sake, not because it serves a purpose or because you have a personal connection to it. This kind of judgment focuses purely on the beauty or artistic value of the object itself, without any external influences. VI\. POETICS What is catharsis, according to Aristotle? According to Aristotle, catharsis is the emotional release or purification that the audience experiences after watching a tragedy. It involves feelings of pity and fear that are ultimately cleansed, leading to a sense of relief and renewal. What is the ideal plot arc of a tragedy in Aristotle\'s view? The ideal plot arc of a tragedy, in Aristotle\'s view, includes a beginning, middle, and end. It should involve a serious and complete action that has magnitude, and it should evoke pity and fear in the audience, leading to catharsis. Understand the meaning of anagnorisis (recognition) and peripeteia (reversal). Anagnorisis (recognition) is the moment in the plot when a character makes a critical discovery, often realizing a truth about their identity or situation. Peripeteia (reversal) is a sudden change in the character\'s fortune, often from good to bad, which is closely tied to the anagnorisis and drives the tragic outcome. VII\. "THE MEANING OF LIFE" Understand the myth of Sisyphus. What is it that makes Sisyphus' life pointless, in Taylor's view? And how does Taylor compare the myth to the lives of human beings? -The myth of Sisyphus involves Sisyphus being condemned to roll a boulder up a hill, only for it to roll back down each time he reaches the top, forcing him to start over endlessly. -In Taylor\'s view, what makes Sisyphus\' life pointless is the endless, repetitive nature of his task, which has no lasting achievement or purpose. The effort he puts in is ultimately futile because it leads to no permanent result. -Taylor compares this myth to human lives by suggesting that much of our daily activities and pursuits can also seem repetitive and without ultimate purpose. Just like Sisyphus, we engage in tasks that might appear to have no lasting significance, raising questions about the meaning and value of our own lives. Know the distinction between subjective and objective meaning, and how Taylor applies it to human life. Taylor talks about two types of meanings: subjective and objective. Subjective meaning is personal, like what gives you purpose, while objective meaning is more universal, like a grand purpose for everyone. Taylor suggests that even if life doesn\'t have a big, universal purpose, we can still find personal meaning in our experiences and relationships Know the distinction between hedonism, desire fulfillment theory, and objective list theories of self-interest. Which does Wolf endorse? -Hedonism is the theory that pleasure or happiness is the highest good and primary aim of human life. According to this view, a person\'s well-being is determined by the balance of pleasure over pain. -Desire Fulfillment Theory suggests that a person\'s well-being is determined by the extent to which their desires are satisfied. It\'s not just about pleasure but about getting what you want. -Objective List Theories propose that certain things are intrinsically good for people, regardless of their desires or pleasures. These might include things like knowledge, achievement, and relationships. -Susan Wolf endorses the Objective List Theory. She believes that certain things are objectively good for us and contribute to a meaningful life, even if we don\'t desire them or find them pleasurable. Know what Wolf means when she says that a meaningful life requires active engagement in Wolf means that for a life to be meaningful, it needs to involve active participation in activities or projects that have real value. This means you need to be deeply involved and invested in something that is worthwhile and significant, not just to you personally, but in a broader sense. It's about finding and committing to pursuits that matter and contribute positively to the world or to others.