Up@dawn 2.0

Wednesday, October 23, 2013

Philosoraptors V: Philosophy Strikes Back

Greetings, everyone!

So there really isn't much to report about today's discussion, seeing as most of the period was spent in lecture, so there was not much of a chance for group discussion.

During the lecture, we talked about Berkely v. Locke, and Voltaire v. Leibniz. I found the discussion on Voltaire and Leibniz very interesting, due to Candide being one of those books that I just love to hate. Don't get me wrong, it was an incredibly well-written piece of satire, it's just that things make absolutely zero sense sometimes, and it just irks me. Like the woman who gave up one of her *ahem* buttcheeks to feed the soldiers of a long and drawn out war, only for the war to end the very next day. If Voltaire's point was that we should do more to better the world around us, that sure doesn't accentuate the benefits of doing so. Kind of makes it seem like it's pointless in the end, but I digress.

We also talked at length about Leibniz' view that we live in "the best of all possible worlds," and how Berkeley (someone whom Avery seemed to care very little for) felt that everything around us just exists in our own respective heads, and we are only seeing our ideas projected around us.

And for the most part, that was it, outside of the usual arguing over semantics and what exactly is the definition of a study guide.

Anyway! I can't think of anything interesting and relevant enough to share with you all in this post, but I will update it if I can think of something.

And with that, I hope you all have an awesome weekend, and I'll see you all on Monday!


  1. FQ (LH): Which empiricist wrote an Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, with a chapter specifically attacking the Design Argument for the existence of God?
    David Hume
    DQ (PB): Rousseau argues that people were much happier when they lived in pre-agricultural societies than in "plentiful" competitive society. Do you feel that, as a whole, humanity is happier in a commercial society? How sustainable is a society based on infinite demand and limited resources?

    link to philosophy page on Hume http://www.philosophypages.com/ph/hume.htm

  2. When will the study guide questions be posted for our group?

    Factual Question (PB)- Who is described as one of the great philosophers of the Early Modern period?
    David Hume

    Discussion Question (PB)- Rousseau believed that in civilization, we become entirely driven by our amour-propre (a sense of how others see you). This causes us to be in competition with others and we can never be truly satisfied. Do you find this statement to be true? Why or why not?

    A link to more info on the Ideals of Enlightenment movement, which Rousseau was apart of...

  3. fq (AP) According to Rubin in the 1880's what does high brow mean? Answer Refined. page 164
    Discussion question: The book talks about america's decreasing attention span, do you think that this is true? is this why as the book mentions more and more of our information are being received in short articles and podcasts?

    Link: I found this to be pretty interesting. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpCTR-WGGOU

  4. FQ: (LH p. 100) Which Scottish philosopher, influenced by John Locke, set out to explain the nature of humanity and our place in the universe?
    Answer: Hume

    DQ: On Hume's deathbed in 1776, he responded to the question of whether or not he was worried about what would happen to him after death and his answer was that he was no more worried about after-death as he was before birth. Do you agree with his logic/would you have made a deathbed conversion?

    Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3QZ2Ko-FOg

    As for the FQ list: I'm working on it now (didn't realize this week was halloween), but anyway, could you all that do AP and PB possibly put the page numbers in (if at all possible) and then I can update the list with that. I think it would be really helpful, so that maybe we can do better on this test.

  5. I think Berkeley finally solved our tree problem, as long as we are confident that God exists and is constantly watching over everything, but for Hume, this is not enough. If we can accept Berkeley's hypothesis, we're all good to go on with our lives, but if Hume captures our doubt... there's plenty of philosophizing left to do. For me, I believe that God exists, and that's enough to keep me going in life. I love the pursuit of knowledge and wisdom because I feel that is what we are called to do (we are called to seek God, and God IS Truth), but I feel more at peace with Philosophy (the "Consolation" of philosophy), than a dire skeptic need to understand my existence and my purpose in life. Where do you all stand on this issue? What is your stance on the issue of existence and purpose?

    FQ (LH pg. 107): What is the difference between the "General Will" and the "Will of All?" Answer: The "General Will" is what is truly best for everyone, and the "Will of All" is what everyone thinks is best for themselves, individually.

    DQ (PB): Do you agree with Adam Smith's "Theory of Moral Sentiments?"

    Here's a video that incorporates ethics, social justice, and Adam Smith's Theory of Moral Sentiments: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYH3jNkg8G8&list=PLFRAaCNm6XlIFApjzlD0vEyBuAIdm45NG