Study Questions for the Final

 

(1) According to the compatibilist, the following definition of freedom is incorrect:  X did A freely in C = X did A in C, and X could have refrained from doing A in C* (where C C*).

 

(2) No one believes that freedom can be possible if determinism is true.

 

(3) All eternal beings are necessary.

 

(4) A thing can be physically possible without being logically possible.

 

(5) An analogy is stronger given more numerous differences between the items compared in the analogy.

 

(6) All incompatibilists claim that the universe is deterministic.

 

(7) Making a product that tastes better than other products of that kind is a necessary condition for having a successful business.

 

(8) An Epiphenomenalist is an idealistic monist.

 

(9) A Parallelist is a dualist who believes that the mental and the material do not directly interact.

 

(10) The History Objection to compatibilism assumes that for an action to be free, it is sufficient but not necessary for the desire (wish, want) that causes the action to be free.

 

(11) The Identity Objection to compatibilism is based on the premise that X’s being able to do B in conditions C is relevant to the freedom of X’s doing A in conditions C*, only if C and C* are identical.

 

(12) The Argument from Contingency depends on an analogy.

 

(13) Epiphenomenalism claims that matter does not cause change in minds.

 

(14) If one uses a word in an argument with more than one meaning, one commits the fallacy of equivocation.

 

(15) A deductively invalid argument cannot have a true premise.

 

(16) The following argument has the form of a hypothetical syllogism:

                                                     (1) If John loves Mary, he will propose to her

                                                     (2) If he proposes to her, she will slap him

                                             Therefore:  (3) If John loves Mary, he will get slapped.

 

(17) The following argument commits the Fallacy of Circularity (question-begging):

 

                                                     (1) No one in the world is as good looking as me

                                        Therefore:   (2) I am the most handsome person in the world.

 

(18) The following argument has the form of a conditional proof ( assume that Mary just said: “Do you like my dress?”):

 

                                                       (1) Either I answer Mary’s question truthfully, or I refuse to answer her question.

                                                       (2) If I answer her question truthfully, she will be hurt.

                                                      (3) If I refuse to answer her question, she will be mad at me.

                                             Therefore: (4) Either Mary will be hurt, or she will be mad at me.

 

(19) The Argument from Miracles fails because not everyone believes that miracles have occurred.

 

(20) If one is an indeterminist, then one believes that there is freedom.

 

(21) The “Free-Will Objection to the Argument from Evil claims that what human beings do cannot be evil because human beings have free will.

 

(22) The “Bad is Good” objection to the Argument from Evil claims that there is no difference between good and evil.

 

 

(23) Leibniz’s Law states that two different things cannot share any of their properties.

 

(24) According to deontological theories of goodness, the consequences of an action do not effect the goodness/badness of an action.

 

(25) Even if the universe is spatially finite, this does not mean that the universe is a closed physical system.

 

(26) Being poor is an intrinsic property.

 

(27) Being tall is an extrinsic property.

 

(28) According to all dualists, anything that has spatial location is material.

 

(29) The premise ‘If one experiences something, then that thing exists’ cannot be true unless ‘experiences’ means veridical experience.

 

(30) Even if every time I think of Amanda, a particular neuron in my brain is activated (and vice versa), this does not prove that Dualistic Interactionism is true.

 

(31) If Dualistic Interactionism is true, then the universe is not a closed system.

 

(32) A crucial premise of Descartes’ argument for Dualistic Interactionism is: My body has a property that I do not have.

 

(33) According to Berkeley, the sentence ‘There is a table in front of me’ has to be understood as really talking only about minds and experiences of minds.

 

(34) Even if smelling a rose causes you to think of your lover, smelling a rose need not be a proximate cause of this thought.

 

(35) Occasionalism and pre-established harmony are versions of monism.