Copyright © 2008 Bruce W. Hauptli
The examination will be an in-class objective essay exam. It will be designed to assess the students’ understanding of the philosophical theories, positions, topics, and methodologies studied. The following sample questions are examples of the kinds of questions I will be asking and they are distributed in advance of the exam so that you have an opportunity to organize your thoughts and integrate the readings and lectures around sample questions designed to indicate what your are expected to have mastered. The list of questions is far longer than a reasonable examination could be, and I will ask three such questions on the examination itself. You will be asked to be as complete as you can in writing essays in answer such questions. While there is no "length requirement" for the examination, the questions and exam will be designed so that the average student in this class should need to spend most of the allowed time actively writing. Short answers are unlikely to be sufficiently detailed to earn high grades, and mere outlines or lists (of terms, principles, theories, etc.) do not provide sufficient explanation—they will not convince me that you understand the relevant material. As the questions clearly indicate, I expect you to explain specific points in answering the questions, and an essay which does not address these points is inadequate. The exam will be a closed-book, closed-notes exam, and you will not be allowed to consult dictionaries or other reference texts.
The final exam is in class on Thursday, June 19.
1. What is it one lacks when one can not satisfy Socrates'/Plato's questions like "What is piety" or "What is justice?" Clearly a special sort of answer is sought--knowledge of the forms. What I want you to do is to indicate what is sought (characterize, in general, what he seeks in asking such questions), how he would attain this object, and how much value he attaches to this quest (and why)--could one avoid asking and attempting to answer these questions and yet lead a good life?). In answering this question, make certain you indicate whether the forms change over time, exist in the sensory world, and are subjective. Did we discuss any examples of such forms?
2. Explain why Socrates will not pursue Crito's plan to escape from jail. In answering this question clearly indicate what he believes the harm would be in escaping, and who would be harmed should he decide to escape. Also indicate what it is that Crito seems to value and fear, what Socrates values most, and why the state is important for Plato's Socrates. Provide some indication of why Socrates believes his values here are not merely arbitrary individual preferences.
3. Clarify what Plato's Socrates means, in the Crito by the "expert," and indicate what his argument is as to why we should follow what such "experts" say, rather than what "the many" say. In answering this question, clarify why he is trying to get Crito to see the distinction here, and why it is important to him that Crito get this point. Also indicate whether or not Plato's Socrates believes that "the many" are capable of either great good or harm.
4. Explain what the characteristics of the good state (or individual) are according to Plato. In answering this question explain what he claims the parts of the state (or soul) are, what "virtue" each part should manifest, what the proper relationship of the parts (of the state or soul) is, and clarify what he means by "justice." In your answer you should also clarify what sort of argument he offers to show that justice is more valuable than injustice, and clarify both of the centrally important characteristics which he says his rulers (or philosophers) must have.
5. Clarify what sort of knowledge Plato is seeking by discussing his "divided line" passage and the "metaphor of the cave" in the Republic. I do not expect you to remember either the Greek or English terms for the different "levels" of cognition (or understanding), but I want you to clarify what kind of knowledge or wisdom he wants his rulers to have. What does Plato mean when he says that the forms will not be "between Being and NonBeing?" In answering this question, make certain you also clearly characterize the "Forms" (that is, indicate whether they change over time, exist in the sensory world, and are subjective). Did we discuss any "examples" of forms?
6. Clarify the three "proofs" which Plato offers to establish that the "aristocratic" sort of life which he is in favor of is is the preferable one.
7. Clarify Plato's answers to what I have called the two fundamental questions of his Republic. In answering this question, clarify what each question is, and what his core answer is to each question.
8. Explain Hobbes' reasons for maintaining that human beings should be willing to submit themselves to an absolute sovereign. In answering this question explain what human beings are like according to Hobbes, what conditions are like when individuals are outside a civil society, why individuals are supposed to be willing to give up the extensive liberty they have in a state of nature, clarify the relationship between meaningful (valid) agreements (or contracts) and coercive power (or force), clarify whether or not the sovereign is a contractee, clarify what Hobbes means by "laws of nature," and explain whether there are any rights which egoists will not surrender to the sovereign (and why).
9. Explain Anselm's ontological argument. Indicate how the argument goes and what it is supposed to prove. In answering the question, clarify what "necessary existence" is (for example, by contrasting this sort of existence with the "other" kinds), the distinction between "exists in the understanding" and "exists in reality," and clarify Anselm's use of `greater'.
10. In his "First Meditation" Descartes clarifies his reasons for skepticism, and in his "Second Meditation" he explains why we need not accept the skeptics' view that we know nothing. Clarify both the arguments for skepticism and against it as Descartes gives them. In answering this question, clearly explain what it is which he claims to know (as his first secure knowledge claim), how secure he takes this knowledge to be, what kind of thing he knows himself to be, and how his knowledge survives the various doubts he offered in his "First Meditation."
File revised on 06/08/2008.