TGIF!
According to Gangadean, consistently held skepticism leads to what?
Nihilism
If I were to say, "Reason is transcendental." what I mean is...
Reason is authoritative! It stand above all thinking as it makes thinking possible.
What are the 3 laws of thought?
The law of identity (a is a), the law of non-contradiction (not both a and non-a in the same respect and at the same time), and the law of excluded middle (either a or non-a).
What are the five features of Philosophy?
area, attitude, method, application, and system (explain each of these for an additional 100pts)
What are the four USES of reason?
Formative, Critical, Interpretive, constructive (explain the logical progression of these for an additional 100pts)
Why is a worldview based on sound reasoning so important?
Anything like: Makes sense of all aspects of human experience; Satisfies the human need for meaning; Retains meaning in one’s life even when there are internal and external challenges of reason
Unless the demands of reason become persistent and inescapable, we tend to do what with reason in regards to our basic beliefs?
neglect, avoid, resist, and deny )explain the logical progression of these for an extra 200pts)
If I were to say that something is both a and non-a at the same time and in the same respect, I am violating what law?
The law of non-contradiction
If someone says that the learning you're doing in Philo class is only rational for Westerners but is not the way people reason in all cultures, the person is...
denying that reason is natural (or breaking the "law" of reason in us that expresses the FACT that reason is natural)
According to Gangadean, what is clear to reason?
Basic things! (or beliefs)
Why does Gangadean insist that, “Lack of integrity complicates the efforts to show what is clear”?
Since integrity means a commitment to consistency of thought, someone who lacks this integrity is willing to self-deceive or self-justify to deny what is clear.
Our FIRST Statement to Memorize (word-for-word)
The existential burden of nihilism is intolerable; it cannot with integrity be borne." (Explain this statement in your own words for an additional 100pts)
As Gangadean explains in great detail in ch. 2, there are many versions of skepticism. If I were to say, “Look, the only way you can really know if anything is real is if you can see it. Haven't you heard? Seeing is believing!" What form of skepticism am I displaying?
Empiricism
This term means holding to a belief without any proof as to how that belief can be true or coincides with reality.
Fideism (Fideism can be both theistic and non-theistic. True or False? Explain for an extra 100pts)
If I were to say that you first need to make sure you use reason for self-examination to ensure your basic beliefs are meaningful, I am referring to...
Reason as critical
As Gangadean explains in great detail in ch. 2, there are many versions of skepticism. If I were to say, “Look, you can’t really know anything for certain, it is all a matter of interpretation.” What form of skepticism am I displaying?
Construction and Deconstruction
As Gangadean explains in great detail in ch. 2, there are many versions of skepticism. If I were to say, “Look, you believe what you do because that’s what culture you were born into. If I were an American, I'd probably have some sort of Judeo-Christian belief. If I were born into an Asian culture, I’d have a Buddhist or a Hindu belief.” What form of skepticism am I displaying?
Tradition and Transcendence
As Gangadean explains in great detail in ch. 2, there are many versions of skepticism. If I were to say, “Look, the one who's in charge gets to tell us what's true.” What form of skepticism am I displaying?
Truth and Power
What is the most basic question that can be asked?
"What is eternal (or real)?"
As Gangadean explains in ch. 2, fideism takes on many forms. If I were to say, “Deep down everybody knows God and so there’s no reason to use your intellect, after all, you have your intuition.” What form of fideism am I displaying?
Sensus Divinitatis (explain why this is a source of fideism even if it's true for an additional 100pts)
As Gangadean explains in great detail in ch. 2, there are many versions of skepticism. If I were to say, “What is true is what works for you. ‘The proof is in the pudding’ as the saying goes.” What form of skepticism am I displaying?
Pragmatism
What qualities MUST the eternal possess if it is to be eternal?
Independent, Self-existing, Self-maintaining, and Self-explaining
Our SECOND Statement to Memorize (word-for-word)
Not to believe the conclusion of a sound argument is to disqualify oneself as a person committed to the use of reason, and thereby no longer qualified to participate in dialogue with those who are committed to reason.
The basic beliefs about what is eternal are between these two CONTRADICTORIES...
"all is eternal" & "only some is eternal"
Gangadean says, “There is no rational justification for failure to know what is clear. One has to neglect, avoid, resist or deny reason in order to avoid what is clear.” What scripture reflects the above statement.
Romans 1:20
(just getting the reference with a paraphrase of the content is full points)
For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.
The Socratic dictum, "The unexamined life is not worth living." is something Gangadean references when he's talking about...
Philosophy as an application (that of self-examination).
When talking about _________________________ as a source of _______________, Gangadean says, "In response it can be said that it is a higher level of awareness to recognize interpretation... at work."
Construction and Deconstruction; skepticism
When discussing the source of ___________ called _________________________, Gagadean mentioned "...the Genesis account is to be understood in light of what is clear from general revelation..."
fideism; Reason and Hermeneutics
List at least 10 of the 12 informal fallacies we covered and tell me which informal fallacy Gangadean said this about... "This is an argument against a misrepresentation of a position rather than the real position."
appeal to fear, appeal to pity, straw man, ad hominem, appeal to authority, ad populum, begging the question, red herring, appeal to the unknown, post hoc, hasty generalization, complex question
Give a brief summary of why the order of chapters 1-3 make sense and what topic would make the most sense to come next in chapter 4.
I am listening for something like, "Chapter 1 begins by arguing that we can know basic things. It then introduces us to the depth of philosophy and gives us details on the importance or reason, which can be seen in itself, its uses, and in us and must be used critically to know basic things. Chapter 2 basically shows why some people don't pursue the knowledge of basic things - they think you can't (skepticism) or that you don't need to (fideism). Chapter 3 shows us that you can use reason to know basic things and that when you apply reason you see that the most basic question is "What is eternal?" I'm guessing that this means that chapter 4 will begin to explore what is eternal.