Instructions

Pick just one of the following topics to write about. Your paper should be approximately 750–1250 words, and it is due by 11/23 at 11:59pm. You may want to review my instructions on writing a philosophy paper before you get started.

A. We all have lots of knowledge. That much seems clear. But what does it take to have knowledge? What exactly are the conditions, in other words, under which a subject S knows a proposition p? One proposal is this:

S knows p if and only if:
(i) p is true;
(ii) S believes p; and
(iii) S is justified in believing p.

This is the traditional analysis of knowledge. Edmund Gettier famously argues that it is incorrect. In the first part of your paper, explain why Gettier, along with may other philosophers, now think that the traditional analysis is mistaken.

Having concluded that the traditional analysis is incorrect, some philosophers made the following proposal about what it takes to have knowledge:

S knows p if and only if:
(i) p is true;
(ii) S believes p;
(iii) S is justified in believing p; and
(iv) S‘s belief in p is not based on any false assumptions.

This is the no false lemmas analysis. In the next part of your paper, explain why, having rejected the traditional view, some philosophers accepted the no false lemmas analysis instead.

Finally, even though the no false lemmas analysis seems superior to the traditional view, the no false lemmas analysis has also been criticized. In the final part of your paper, discuss whether the no false lemmas analysis succumbs to those criticisms or survives them.

B. Consider the hypothesis that you are a, “brain-in-a-vat being stimulated to have the very sensory experiences [you are] now having.” Call that the BIV (short for brain-in-a-vat) hypothesis. Now consider the following argument:

(1) You do not know that the BIV hypothesis is wrong.

(2) If you do not know that the BIV hypothesis is wrong, then you do not know that you have hands.

So: (3) You do not know that you have hands.

According to the contextualist, whenever someone puts forward this argument, it would be a mistake to deny what they are saying. Everything they say is true. However, the contextualist says, that does not mean that, if, in the course of ordinary life, you claim to know that you have hands, you are wrong. According to the contextualist, you still speak truly if, in the course of ordinary life, you say, “I know that I have hands.”

How can that be? That is, how would the contextualist explain why the person making the above argument is correct when they say, “You do not know that you have hands,” and you are also correct when, in the course of ordinary life, you say, “I do know that I have hands”? Is the contextualist’s position plausible? Why or why not?

C. In Descartes’ Meditation VI, there is a passage that begins, “First, I know that everything which I clearly and distinctly understand…” and that ends with the line, “And accordingly, it is certain that I am really distinct from my body, and can exist without it” (318). In that passage, Descartes argues that he is distinct from his body. What is the argument that Descartes offers, in that passage, for the conclusion that he is distinct from his body? What is Arnauld’s objection (323) to Descartes’ argument? Does it succeed in showing that Descartes’ argument is unsound? If not, is there another objection that does?

D. In, “Mind and Behavior,” Kim defines behaviorism as the view that, “Any meaningful psychological statement, that is, a statement purportedly describing a mental phenomenon, can be translated, without loss of content, into a cluster of statements solely about behavioral and physical phenomena” (68). In your paper, answer these questions:

• What exactly does behaviorism claim? Explain using your own examples.
• What motivated philosophers to accept behaviorism? That is, what advantage did it supposedly have over the traditional Cartesian view?
• What are some of the problems facing behaviorism? Are they insurmountable problems, or is there a way for the behaviorist to rebut the criticisms that have been made against the behaviorist view?

E. In his article, “Sensations and Brain Processes,” Smart defends the mind-brain identity theory. What does that theory say? What is Putnam’s argument against it? Is Putnam’s argument against the identity theory sound? If not, why not?

F. In section 4 of “The Hard Problem of Consciousness,” Chalmers argues that materialism—the view that “our world is wholly physical”—is false. What is the argument that Chalmers presents against materialism in that section? Is his argument sound? If not, why not?

Grading

• 90-100 percent: Directly addresses all questions that the paper is supposed to address. Entirely or almost entirely accurate in how it describes the theories or arguments at issue. Explanations are exceptionally clear, using well-constructed examples where appropriate. Author’s opinions on the the theories or arguments under discussion are thoughtful and show an awareness of alternative viewpoints (e.g., author notices potential objections to their own views and offers well-considered replies).
• 80-89 percent: Directly addresses all questions that the paper is supposed to address. Mostly accurate in how it describes the theories or arguments at issue, but perhaps includes some non-trivial misunderstandings. Explanations are usually clear and straightforward, if confusing in spots. Author’s opinions on the theories or arguments under discussion are reasonable, but perhaps not particularly well-supported or fully explored.
• 70-79 percent: Might not address in any meaningful way at least some question that the paper is supposed to address. Somewhat accurate in how it describes the theories or arguments at issue, but significant errors or misunderstandings are present. Explanations are inconsistent, perhaps clear in parts, but significantly confusing or incomplete in others. Author’s opinions on the theories or arguments under discussion are not developed or explored in any meaningful way.
• 60-69 percent: Might not address in any meaningful way some questions that the paper is supposed to address. Largely inaccurate in how it describes the theories or arguments at issue, or explanations are too unclear to evaluate in many instances.
• 0-59 percent: No submission, or paper is almost entirely off-topic, or else is too confusing to understand more than bits and pieces.

Late Policy

10 points will be subtracted from any paper submitted within the first 24 hour period after the deadline; 20 points will be subtracted from any paper submitted in the second 24 hour period after the deadline; and 30 points will be subtracted from any paper submitted in the third 24 hour period after the deadline. Any paper submitted after that point will receive 1/2 credit. That is, I will give you 1/2 as many points as you would have gotten had you turned the paper in on time.

Plagiarism policy

• Plagiarism is defined as, “us[ing] another person’s ideas or expressions in your writing without acknowledging the source” (MLA Handbook, 5th ed., section 1.8).
• For the first offense, you will receive a zero on the assignment in question, with no opportunity to improve your grade on that assignment.
• For the second offense, you will receive an F for the course and will be subject to college disciplinary action. Students are encouraged to review plagiarism policies in the current Berkeley City College catalog.