Up@dawn 2.0

Thursday, October 16, 2014

Backup Quiz Oct.15/16

1. Sarah Bakewell says 16th century French philosopher Michel de Montaigne was following whose example, when he retreated to his tower to write and reflect? PB 52

2. What was Montaigne's "near death experience," and what did it teach him? PB 53

3. What did Montaigne learn from the Epicureans? PB 54

4. Historically, scientific observation and tests replaced "truth  by ______" as exemplified by Aristotle and the Church. P 121

5. An argument whose conclusion must be true if its premises are true is called _______. (inductive, deductive, abductive) P125

6. _______ is Karl Popper's view that science and knowledge progress by conjecture and refutation rather than proof, and that a theory which cannot in principle be falsified is unscientific; Thomas Kuhn said science progresses by _______ shifts. P 131, 135
BONUS: How did Montaigne differ from Descartes with respect to the role of doubt? PB 57

BONUS+: Name one of the philosophers Bakewell (or Oliver) says Montaigne influenced. PB 59

BONUS++: What skeptical slogan did Montaigne inscribe on the ceiling of his study? U@d

BONUS+++: Nigel says ____ can better be addressed by novelists and poets than by scientists, showing that _______ overvalues scientific explanation. (Fill in one for full bonus credit.) P 136


1. At what age do you hope to retire? What will you do with yourself then? Will you plan to spend more time thinking?

2. Have you had a near-death experience, or known someone who did? What did it teach you/them? How often does the thought occur to you that you're always one misstep (or fall, or driving mistake) away from death?

3. What have you learned, so far, about "how to live"? Have you formulated any life-lessons based on personal experience, inscribed any slogans, written down any "rules"?

4. Are there any "authorities" (personal, textual, political, religious, institutional, traditional...) to whom you always and automatically defer? Can you justify this, intellectually or ethically?

5. Can you give an example of something you believe on the basis of probability, something else you believe because it has to be true (= follows necessarily from other premises you accept as true), and something you believe because you think it's the "best explanation")? Do you think most of your beliefs conform to one or another of these kinds of explanation?

6. Do you think science makes genuine progress? Does it gradually give us a better, richer account of the natural world and our place in it? Is there a definite correlation between technology and scientific understanding? Do you think there is anything that cannot or should not be studied scientifically? Why?

No comments:

Post a Comment