Copy and Edit

Philosophy 102

Description

102 Philosophy Quiz on Philosophy 102, created by Nadine Te on 20/04/2016.
Nadine Te
Quiz by Nadine Te, updated more than 1 year ago
Nadine Te
Created by Nadine Te about 8 years ago
151
1
0

Resource summary

Question 1

Question
Which of the following is not a subfield of philosophy?
Answer
  • epistemology
  • metaphysics
  • physics
  • metaethics
  • ethics

Question 2

Question
Epistemology addresses questions about
Answer
  • The nature of knowledge
  • Justification
  • The nature of truth
  • All of the above
  • Both (A) and (B)

Question 3

Question
When is a belief that P true?
Answer
  • When it is knowledge
  • When it corresponds to reality
  • When it is justified
  • Both A and B
  • None of the above

Question 4

Question
Person A justifiably believes that the Canadian government should legalise marijuana, whereas person B justifiably believes that the Canadian government should not legalise marijuana. From this disagreement, we can conclude that:
Answer
  • Either A or B is mistaken.
  • Neither A nor B is mistaken.
  • Both A and B are correct, relative to their own perspective.
  • There is no fact of the matter about whether the Canadian government should legalise marijuana.
  • We cannot conclude anything about this case.

Question 5

Question
Very often, the kinds of questions asked in philosophy
Answer
  • Have no specific answers
  • have answers that merely express someone's opinions
  • Can be answered by observational means
  • Cannot be answered by observational means
  • Are pointless

Question 6

Question
An argument is deductively valid just in case
Answer
  • It is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion to be false
  • It is possible for the premises to be true and the conclusion to be true
  • It is impossible for the premises to be false and the conclusion to be true
  • It is possible for the premises to be false and the conclusion to be true

Question 7

Question
An argument is sound just in case
Answer
  • The conclusion is plausible
  • The conclusion is true
  • The premises are true
  • It is valid
  • Both C and D
  • None of the above

Question 8

Question
If the conspiracy theories are true, Neil Armstrong never really landed on the moon. Indeed, Neil Armstrong never landed on the moon because the conspiracy theories are, in fact, true.
Answer
  • Cogent
  • Plausible
  • Implausible
  • Valid
  • Invalid

Question 9

Question
If the conspiracy theories are true, Neil Armstrong never really landed on the moon. But all conspiracy theories are false. So, Neil Armstrong did, in fact, land on the moon.
Answer
  • Cogent
  • Plausible
  • Implausible
  • Valid
  • Invalid

Question 10

Question
"All grukes are toves, and all toves are outgrabes. So, there is at least a gruke that is an outgrabe." This argument is (N.B. "Grukes", "toves", and "outgrabes" are not words in English; they are nonsensical. Still, you should be in a position to answer this question.) *NB This argument is invalid, although I intended it to be valid. So you get a mark if you answered one of these. But it is invalid since the conclusion entails the existence of something, while the premises do not. This argument is (N.B. "Grukes", "toves", and "outgrabes" are not words in English; they are nonsensical. Still, you should be in a position to answer this question.)
Answer
  • Valid
  • Sound
  • Invalid
  • Unsound
  • Nonsensical

Question 11

Question
"If Keanu Reeves is a good actor, then I'm a monkey's uncle. Of course, I'm not a monkey's uncle: Keanu Reeves is not a good actor." This argument is
Answer
  • True
  • Sound
  • Valid
  • Invalid
  • Unsound

Question 12

Question
"Philosophy is to be studied, not for the sake of any definite answers to its questions, since no definite answers can, as a rule, be known to be true, but rather for the sake of the questions themselves; because these questions enlarge our conception of what is possible, enrich our intellectual imagination and diminish the dogmatic assurance which closes the mind against speculation; but above all because, through the greatness of the universe which philosophy contemplates, the mind is also rendered great, and becomes capable of that union with the universe which constitutes its highest good." The conclusion of the above passage is that
Answer
  • No definite answers to philosophical questions can be known to be true
  • Philosophical questions enlarge our conception of what is possible
  • Philosophy should be studied for the sake of the questions themselves
  • Philosophical questions enrich our intellectual imagination
  • None of the above

Question 13

Question
Consider the following claims: (1) My closet is full of old ski boots. (2) My closet is full of old things. Which of the two is stronger, in the strict logical sense?
Answer
  • (2) is stronger, in the strict logical sense, than (1)
  • (1) is stronger, in the strict logical sense, than (2)
  • (1) and (2) are logical equivalent
  • There is no strict logical relation between (1) and (2)

Question 14

Question
According to the principle of charity,
Answer
  • One should interpret an author's argument in its most favourable light
  • One should never question or doubt the conclusion of famous philosophers
  • One should donate a small portion of one's annual income to a reputable charity
  • One should never object to an argument whose conclusion is obviously false

Question 15

Question
(1) Bob Dylan wrote "Visions of Johanna". (2) America's most important singer/songwriter wrote "Visions of Johanna". Which of the two is stronger, in the strict logical sense?
Answer
  • (1) is stronger, in the strict logical sense, than (2)
  • (2) is stronger, in the strict logical sense, than (1)
  • (1) and (2) are logical equivalent
  • There is no strict logical relation between (1) and (2)

Question 16

Question
One commits the fallacy of equivocation when
Answer
  • One argues in a circle
  • One identities two things as equals when, in fact, they are not
  • One pretends to know what they are talking about when, in fact, one does not
  • One uses keywords in various senses in different parts of one's argument

Question 17

Question
"Begging the question" names an argumentative fallacy, according to which
Answer
  • One argues in a circle
  • One assumes the very thing one is trying to prove
  • One attempts to prove one's thesis by asking a rhetorical question
  • Both A and B
  • None of the above

Question 18

Question
"Abortion is morally wrong because a fetus is a human being, and killing human beings is morally wrong". This argument
Answer
  • Argues in a circle
  • Is invalid
  • Commits the fallacy of equivocation
  • Proves too much

Question 19

Question
"Vegans will tell you that you should stop eating meat. But most vegans are idiots. We should keep eating meat." This argument
Answer
  • Is cogent
  • Commits a strawman fallacy
  • Is an ad hominem
  • Is sound
  • Reminds me that I must water my plants

Question 20

Question
Locate yourself on this map. (N.B. This question is a freebie: You get a mark for simply trying.)
Answer
  • any answer
  • is correct

Question 21

Question
Moral or ethical relativism is the view according to which
Answer
  • The truth of utterances of the form "action A done in culture C is morally wrong" is relative to the speaker
  • Evaluating the norms of our culture is impossible
  • The deontic status of an action A done in culture C is determined by the moral code of C
  • Both B and C

Question 22

Question
According to the anthropological argument, what best explains the fact that different cultures have different moral codes is that
Answer
  • There are no moral standards or norms whose correctness or validity is independent of the moral norms a culture does or might accept, and thus they express universally valid moral standards that apply to all cultures
  • Different cultures have different non-moral beliefs about the natural world
  • Different strokes for different folks
  • None of the above

Question 23

Question
The moral codes of some cultures contain basic and fundamental moral norms that conflict with the basic and fundamental moral norms that make up the moral code of different cultures, and these conflicts are widespread. This thesis is called
Answer
  • Moral relativism
  • Moral diversity thesis
  • Ethical relativism
  • Universality thesis
  • None of the above

Question 24

Question
Jack promised his mother to mow the lawn first thing Sunday morning. So, Jack has a pro tanto duty to mow the lawn first thing Sunday morning. Diane, Jack's sister, made no such promise. So, Diane does not have a duty to mow the lawn first thing Sunday morning. What is the most plausible explanation for this difference in what Jack and Diane ought to do?
Answer
  • The unity thesis is false
  • The moral diversity thesis is true
  • Moral relativism is true
  • Context-sensitivity

Question 25

Question
According to the moral absolutism
Answer
  • Matters of morality are universal
  • Matters of morality of absolute
  • There are objective truths
  • Morality does not depend on a person's desires, interests, or goals
  • All of the above
  • None of the above

Question 26

Question
How has the view that different cultures have different moral codes been described in lecture?
Answer
  • Moral diversity thesis
  • Cultural relativism
  • Descriptive relativism
  • All of the above
  • B and C only
  • None of the above

Question 27

Question
Which of the following claim does not best describe ethical relativism?
Answer
  • Different cultures have different moral norms
  • The moral code of a society determines what is right and what is wrong in that society
  • There is no objective and independent standard to judge the practices and institutions of other cultures
  • Our moral code has no special status
  • None of the above

Question 28

Question
According to James Rachels, the cultural differences argument for ethical relativism is
Answer
  • False
  • True
  • Valid but unsound
  • Invalid
  • Invalid but sound

Question 29

Question
Which of the following claims, according to Rachels, could someone not truly utter if ethical relativism were true?
Answer
  • The practice of infanticide endorsed by members of my culture is morally permissible
  • The practice of infanticide endorsed by members of my culture is morally impermissible
  • The practice of infanticide endorsed by members of a different culture is morally permissible
  • The practice of infanticide endorsed by members of a different culture is morally impermissible
  • All of the above
  • B, C, D only

Question 30

Question
One consequence of taking ethical relativism seriously is that
Answer
  • Our moral views may turn out to be mistaken
  • It makes it difficult to makes sense of what seems to be commonsensical moral concepts
  • All truths (not merely moral truths) are susceptible to relativity
  • There can be no genuine disagreement about moral matters

Question 31

Question
What should be concluded from the fact that different cultures have different moral codes?
Answer
  • None of our preferences and practices are based on some absolute and independent standard
  • Not all of our preferences and practices are based on some absolute and independent standard
  • All of our preferences and practices are based on some absolute and independent standard
  • There is no single true morality
  • We should not conclude anything from this fact

Question 32

Question
What could explain the fact that different cultures have different moral codes?
Answer
  • A difference in fundamental moral beliefs
  • A difference in non-fundamental moral beliefs
  • A difference in non-moral beliefs
  • All of the above
  • None of the above

Question 33

Question
According to Gilbert Harman's brand of moral relativism
Answer
  • All moral judgments make sense only in relation to and with reference to some implicit agreement or tacit understanding about their relations with one another.
  • Some, but not all, judgments make sense only in relation to and with reference to some implicit agreement or tacit understanding about their relations with one another.
  • No moral judgment makes sense only in relation to and with reference to some implicit agreement or tacit understanding about their relations with one another.
  • Non-inner judgements make sense only in relation to and with reference to some implicit agreement or tacit understanding about their relations with one another.

Question 34

Question
According to Harman, inner judgments
Answer
  • Entail claims about what people have reasons do to
  • Typically presuppose that the speaker endorses the reasons the speaker takes the agent to have
  • Typically presuppose that the audience endorses the reasons the speaker takes the agent to have
  • All of the above
  • Entail claims about value

Question 35

Question
According to internalism about reasons
Answer
  • A necessary condition for a consideration R to be a reason for agent A to do D is that R is related to A's subjective motivational set
  • A sufficient condition for a consideration R to be a reason for agent A to do D is that R is related to A's subjective motivational set
  • Both A and B
  • Neither A nor B

Question 36

Question
What is not considered to be part of an agent's subjective motivational set?
Answer
  • Beliefs
  • Desires
  • Values
  • Intentions
  • Plans

Question 37

Question
Suppose Juliana is a member of a community that has implicitly agreed to sacrifice each family's first-born baby in order to honour the flying spaghetti monster. If Harman's brand of moral relativism is true, which of the following claims could we not truly utter?
Answer
  • It ought not be the case that Juliana sacrifices her first-born to honour the flying spaghetti monster
  • The practice of sacrificing one's first-born endorsed by Juliana and members of her community is morally egregious
  • Sacrificing one's first-born in order to honour the flying spaghetti monster is morally wrong
  • Like every other member of her community, Juliana ought not sacrifice her first-born to honour the flying spaghetti monster
  • Both C and D

Question 38

Question
What primary reason does Harman offer to support his version of moral relativism?
Answer
  • The moral diversity thesis
  • It best explains certain aspects of our moral thought and discourse
  • Facts about how people use the words 'ought' and 'morally wrong'
  • Harman doesn't offer a reason to support his version of moral relativism

Question 39

Question
If Harman's version of moral relativism is true, can we evaluate the moralities of different cultures or society?
Answer
  • No, morality is relative
  • Yes, Harman's brand of relativism is sophisticated
  • I don't know, Harman's brand of relativism is inconsistent
  • I don't know, I don't fully understand Harman's brand of moral relativism

Question 40

Question
You get a mark simply for answering this question. You get an additional mark if you answer it correctly. Suppose you find yourself in a strange island inhabited by knights, who always tell the truth, and knaves, who always lie. Suppose further that you stumble upon two inhabitants, Jones and Smith, but don’t know whether they’re knights or knaves. It is extremely important that you find out what they are, since only knights can help you find your way back home. So you ask them to reveal their identity. Jones states: "I and Smith are not the same". Smith replies: "There is exactly one knight among us". What are Jones and Smith?
Answer
  • Both Jones and Smith are knights
  • Jones is a knight and Smith is a knave
  • Jones is a knave and Smith is a knight
  • Both Jones and Smith are knaves
  • There is not enough information to determine what are Jones and Smith

Question 41

Question
What is the trolley problem?
Answer
  • Explaining why it is morally permissible in some cases to kill one person in order to save five, but not morally permissible in other cases
  • Explaining why it is morally required in some cases to kill one person in order to save five, but not morally required in other cases
  • Explaining why it is morally permissible to push a fat man over a bridge in order to stop a runaway trolley that will otherwise hit and kill five people, but not morally permissible for a transplant surgeon to kill one person in order to harvest their organs and transplant them into five dying patients
  • Explaining why killing is not always worse than letting die

Question 42

Question
Which trolley case provides a counterexample to the principle that killing is worse than letting die?
Answer
  • The driver case
  • The bystander at the switch case
  • The fat man case
  • The mayor case
  • All of the above

Question 43

Question
According to J.J. Thomson, it is permissible to kill one person in order to save five people only if
Answer
  • The act consists in diverting a threat to the five onto the one
  • The act does not directly violate the one’s stringent rights
  • The act is one whose maxim is universalizable
  • Both A and B
  • None of the above

Question 44

Question
According to the principle of alternate possibilities, a person is morally responsible for what she has done
Answer
  • If and only if she could have acted otherwise
  • If she could have acted otherwise
  • Only if she could have acted otherwise
  • Only if determinism is false

Question 45

Question
According to H. Frankfurt, what is a reason to think that the principle of alternate possibilities is true?
Answer
  • Many people believe it to be true
  • The objectivity of morality presupposes it to be true
  • It is an analytic truth
  • It is a generalized version of the idea that coercion and moral responsibility are mutually exclusive
  • None of the above

Question 46

Question
Which of the following is a necessary condition for coercion?
Answer
  • There is a circumstance that makes it sufficient that someone could not have acted otherwise
  • The circumstance that makes it sufficient that someone could not have acted otherwise plays an appropriate role in explaining why you did what you did
  • both A and B
  • None of the above

Question 47

Question
Jones decides for reasons of his own to rig the state lottery. Then, someone threatens Jones with a very harsh penalty (so harsh that any reasonable person would submit to the threat), unless he rigs the state lottery. But Jones is not a reasonable man. Once he has decided to do something, he does it. And so Jones rigs the state lottery. Is Jones coerced into rigging the state lottery?
Answer
  • Jones is coerced into rigging the state lottery
  • Jones is not coerced into rigging the state lottery
  • There is no fact of the matter whether Jones is coerced into rigging the state lottery
  • Jones is coerced into rigging the state lottery but is nevertheless morally responsible for rigging the state lottery

Question 48

Question
Which of the cases discussed in the in-class survey is supposed to be a counterexample to the principle of alternate possibilities?
Answer
  • The case of Phyllis
  • The case of Dwight
  • The case of Kelly
  • The case of Meredith

Question 49

Question
Which of the following principles does Frankfurt believe is not susceptible to Frankfurt-style counterexamples?
Answer
  • A person is not morally responsible for what they have done if they did it because they could not have done otherwise
  • A person is not morally responsible for what they have done if they did it only because they could not have done otherwise
  • A person is not morally responsible for what they have done only if they were coerced to do it
  • A person is not morally responsible for what they have done if they did it as a result of working for Michael Scott

Question 50

Question
According to the free will thesis
Answer
  • Everyone has free will
  • No one has free will
  • Some people don’t have free will
  • Some people have free will
  • Free will is an illusion

Question 51

Question
Soft determinism is the view that
Answer
  • While every event in the world is causally determined, some people have free will
  • Every event in the world is causally determined, which is incompatible with the idea that some people have free will
  • Some people have free will, and that is incompatible with the idea that every event in the world is causally determined
  • Given the past and the laws of nature, the future is determined in every detail

Question 52

Question
According to Van Inwagen the following principle is not susceptible to Frankfurt-style counterexamples:
Answer
  • The principle of planned parenthood
  • The principle of plausible possession
  • The principle of possible prevention
  • The principle of plausible possibilities

Question 53

Question
According to Van Inwagen, the following condition(s) need(s) to be met for an example to constitute a counterexample to PPP:
Answer
  • The agent could not have done otherwise
  • The agent could not have prevent the event (or state of affairs) from happening (obtaining)
  • The agent is morally responsible for the event (or state of affairs)
  • Both b and c
  • None of the above

Question 54

Question
According to the control condition
Answer
  • We are morally assessable only to the extent that we what are assessed for is morally praiseworthy
  • We are morally assessable only to the extent that we could have done otherwise
  • We are morally assessable only to the extent that what we are assessed for depends on factor under our control
  • None of the above

Question 55

Question
Which of the following criteria is not specifically a criterion of agent-regret?
Answer
  • Thought directed at one’s action
  • Thought about how much better it would have been otherwise
  • Can extend beyond what one does intentionally
  • Calls for compensation or restitution on the part of the agent

Question 56

Question
What, according to Williams, can we not correctly say of Gauguin’s decision of leaving his family to pursue a career as a painter if i) – Gauguin fails to become a successful painter, and ii) – this failure his due to extrinsic factors (e.g. getting into an incapacitating accident on his way to Tahiti)?
Answer
  • Gauguin’s decision was not justified
  • Gauguin’s decision was justified
  • Gauguin’s decision was unjustified
  • Both B and C
  • None of the above

Question 57

Question
Which of the following is not a kind of luck discussed by T. Nagel?
Answer
  • Constitutive luck
  • Contributive luck
  • Resultant luck
  • Causal luck
  • Circumstantial luck

Question 58

Question
According to Nagel, Williams sidesteps the main question of moral luck. Rather than showing that morality is not immune to luck, Williams shows that
Answer
  • Ultimate regret need not be moral regret
  • Rational justification is not immune to luck
  • Both A and B
  • None of the above

Question 59

Question
According to Nagel, the solution to the problem of moral luck is to
Answer
  • Accept moral luck and reject the control condition
  • Deny moral luck and revise our moral practices
  • Deny moral luck and keep our moral practices intact
  • There is no solution to the problem of moral luck

Question 60

Question
Suppose you find yourself on a strange island inhabited by knights, who always tell the truth, and knaves, who always lie. You meet three inhabitants: Peggy, Joe and Zippy. Peggy claims, “I am a knight or Joe is a knave.” Joe tells you, “I know that Peggy is a knight and that Zippy is a knave.” Zippy says, “I and Joe are different.” What are Peggy, Joe, and Zippy?
Answer
  • All three are knights
  • All three are knaves
  • Peggy is the only knight
  • Joe is the only knight
  • Zippy is the only knight
  • Peggy is the only knave
  • Joe is the only knave
  • Zippy is the only knave
  • There is not enough information to determine what Peggy, Joe, and Ziggy are

Question 61

Question
Very roughly, the nonidentity problem consists in
Answer
  • The problem of trying to explain the wrongness done onto certain kinds of people that do not seem to be harmed in any kind of way
  • The problem of trying to explain why two seemingly nonidentical things are, in fact, identical
  • The problem of deriving an ‘ought’ from an ‘is’
  • The problem of deriving an ‘is’ from an ‘ought’

Question 62

Question
What are nonidentity cases?
Answer
  • A kind of thought-experiment or example
  • Persons who are caused to have necessarily flawed existence
  • Cases of two things that are not identical to each other
  • None of the above

Question 63

Question
Which of the following schemata is not part of the set of claims that generates the nonidentity problem?
Answer
  • X wrongs Y
  • The way that X wrongs Y is by causing Y harm
  • X causes Y harm by making Y worse off than Y otherwise would have been
  • Y is worse off than they otherwise would have been
  • None of the above

Question 64

Question
How can one go about solving the nonidentity problem?
Answer
  • Pretend it doesn’t exist
  • Identify which member of the set of inconsistent claims that generates the problem is false
  • Provide an error theory that explains why we naturally thought some false claim was true
  • Both B and C
  • None of the above

Question 65

Question
According to Smolkin, how does Schwartz’s solve the nonidentity problem?
Answer
  • By denying that people described in putative examples of nonidentity cases are wronged
  • By denying that people described in putative examples of nonidentity cases are made worse off
  • By shifting the locus of harm from identity cases to their creators
  • All of the above
  • Both B and C
  • None of the above

Question 66

Question
According to Smolkin, how does Parfit solve the nonidentity problem?
Answer
  • By denying that people described in putative examples nonidentity cases are made worse off
  • By shifting the focus on nonidentity cases to the value of the state of affairs brought about by the existence of a necessary flawed life
  • By focusing on the rights of future people
  • All of the above
  • Both A and B
  • None of the above

Question 67

Question
How does Smolkin attempt to solve the nonidentity problem?
Answer
  • By explaining the sense in which nonidentity cases are wronged
  • By denying that nonidentity cases are wronged
  • By arguing that future people have the right not to intentionally be brought into a life that contains a defective life stage
  • Both A and C
  • None of the above

Question 68

Question
What is one thing Smolkin claims that needs to be avoided in providing a rights-based solution to the nonidentity problem?
Answer
  • Proving too much
  • Begging the question
  • Committing the strawman fallacy
  • Circular reasoning

Question 69

Question
Given two different population rates, suppose population A contains 100 people, each living a life that’s well worth living (e.g. each life contains 10 unit of happiness). Population B contains twice as many people, each also living a life that’s well worth living, although slightly less that the lives in population A (e.g. each life contains 8 units of happiness). According to the Average Principle
Answer
  • A is better than B
  • B is better than A
  • A is just as good as B
  • The Average Principle does not apply in this case

Question 70

Question
Given two different population rates, suppose population A contains 100 people, each living a life that’s well worth living (e.g. each life contains 10 unit of happiness). Population B contains the same amount of people, each also living a life that’s well worth living, although slightly less that the lives in population A (e.g. each life contains 8 units of happiness). According to the Total Principle
Answer
  • A is better than B
  • B is better than A
  • A is just as good as B
  • The Total Principle does not apply here

Question 71

Question
What is the repugnant conclusion?
Answer
  • Some lives are objectively better than others
  • Compared with the existence of very many people, all of whom have a very high quality of life, there must be some much larger number of people whose existence, if other things are equal, would be better, even though these people would have lives that are barely worth living
  • Compared with the existence of very many people, all of whom have a very high quality of life, it would be better if those whose quality of life was lowest did not exist
  • Some lives are not worth living at all

Question 72

Question
How does Parfit suggest we avoid the repugnant conclusion?
Answer
  • Deny that a world in which there is much more people—each of which has a life worth living, but, on average, has a lesser quality of life than people living in a less populated world—is better than such a less populated world, regardless of the total sum of happiness in each world.
  • Argue that a world in which there is much more people—each of which has a life worth living, but, on average, has a lesser quality of life than people living in a less populated world—would lack some of the things that make life worth living
  • Both A and B
  • Parfit claims we should hesitantly accepts the repugnant conclusion

Question 73

Question
What insight brought forth by Rachels could be used as a way to reject the repugnant conclusion?
Answer
  • The idea that the better than relation is transitive
  • The idea that the better than relation is not transitive
  • The idea that it is better to have five minutes of ecstasy than ten minutes of pleasure only slightly less intense than ecstasy
  • The idea that it is better to endure a pounding migraine for five minutes than endure a mild headache for a week
  • None of the above

Question 74

Question
Which is the following relations is most plausibly not transitive?
Answer
  • X = Y
  • X is the sibling of Y
  • X is taller than Y
  • X is the coach of Y
  • X is faster than Y

Question 75

Question
What is the prisoner’s dilemma intended to show?
Answer
  • You shouldn’t trust anybody
  • It may be rational for two rational agents to choice do something that’s not in each of their best interest
  • You should never cooperate with the police
  • Cooperation requires mutual trust

Question 76

Question
What choice dominates in the prisoner’s dilemma?
Answer
  • The choice to confess
  • The choice to remain silent
  • The choice to confess if the accomplice remains silent
  • The choice to remain silent if the accomplice confesses

Question 77

Question
Which two principles of decision theory seem to give conflicting answers to the game described in Newcomb’s problem?
Answer
  • The principle of utility and the dominance principle
  • The principle of equality and the dominance principle
  • The principle of utility and the principle of equality
  • The principle of expected utility and the dominance principle

Question 78

Question
If one adopts the dominance principle when reasoning about what to do in the game described in Newcomb’s problem, what will such a person decide to do?
Answer
  • Choose one box (box B)
  • Choose both boxes
  • Such a person will invariably be caught in a vicious regress and will never settle on a choice
  • Choose the spotted cheetah in the corner of the room

Question 79

Question
Suppose you find yourself on a strange island inhabited by knights, who always tell the truth, and knaves, who always lie. You meet three inhabitants: Smith, Jones and Pita. Smith claims, “I am a knight or Pita is a knave.” Jones says, “Of I and Pita, exactly one is a knight.” Pita tells you that Jones is a knave. Can you determine what are Smith, Jones, and Pita? Briefly explain your reasoning.
Answer
  • All three are knights
  • All three are knaves
  • Smith is the only knight
  • Jones is the only knight
  • Pita is the only knight
  • Smith is the only knave
  • Jones is the only knave
  • Pita is the only knave
  • There is not enough information to determine what Smith, Jones, and Pita are

Question 80

Question
Suppose you find yourself in a strange island inhabited by knights, who always tell the truth, and knaves, who always lie. You meet three inhabitants: Jones, Smith, and Brown. Jones says “all three of us are knaves”. Smith says “Exactly one of us three is a knight”. Can you determine what Jones, Smith, and Brown are?
Answer
  • All three are knights
  • All three are knaves
  • Jones is the only knight
  • Smith is the only knight
  • Brown is the only knight
  • Jones is the only knave
  • Smith is the only knave
  • Brown is the only knave
  • There is not enough information to determine what Jones, Smith, and Brown are
Show full summary Hide full summary

Want to create your own Quizzes for free with GoConqr? Learn more.

Similar

Breakdown of Philosophy
rlshindmarsh
Who did what now?...Ancient Greek edition
Chris Clark
Reason and Experience Plans
rlshindmarsh
The Cosmological Argument
Summer Pearce
AS Philosophy Exam Questions
Summer Pearce
Philosophy of Art
mccurryby
"The knower's perspective is essential in the pursuit of knowledge." To what extent do you agree?
nataliaapedraza
The Ontological Argument
daniella0128
Religious Experience
alexandramchugh9
Chapter 6: Freedom vs. Determinism Practice Quiz
Kristen Gardner
Environmental Ethics
Jason Edwards-Suarez
Browse Library