Up@dawn 2.0

Friday, February 24, 2017

Quizzes Feb 28, Mar 2

Feb 28-DR 13

1. In the Hellenistic period Western philosophy came to be seen as what? What did the Hellenistic philosophies all praise, and what did they all see as the key to wisdom?

2. Of what later philosophy was Epicureanism the main ancestor?

3. What central problem of philosophy was Epicurus apparently the first to state?

4. From what did the Stoics take their name?

5. What was the one thing the Stoics thought the Epicureans were right about?

6. How does Gottlieb say the Stoics were inconsistent?

DQ

  • What do you think of when you hear the word "therapy"? Do you think philosophers can be good therapists?
  •  Do you think "the greatest happiness of the greatest number" is an appropriate goal in life? Can it be effectively pursued by those who shun "any direct involvement in public life"?
  • If the motion of atoms explains everything, can we be free?
  • Is it true that your private thoughts can never be enslaved?
  • Do you agree with the Stoic critique of Plato's Forms? (321)
  • How do you distinguish things that are and are not subject to your control?
Mar 2, LH 3, DR 13 (p.336-357)

1. What was the main teaching of skepticism? ("Scepticism" in Br. spelling)

2. How did Pyrrho say you could become free from all worry? Does Warburton think this would work for most of us?

3. How does modern skepticism differ from its ancient predecessor?

4. Why does Gottlieb think Pyrrho must not have been as radically skeptical as legend has it?

5. What did David Hume say about too much skepticism?

6. What did "throwing in the sponge" mean, in Sextus Emiricus's story?


DQ

  • Is it possible to go through life questioning and doubting everything, committing always to nothing, and holding no firm opinions? Is it desirable or useful to try doing so?
  • Whose view on the reliability of the senses do you find more persuasive, Pyrrho's or Epicurus's (see DR 309-10)
  • In what ways are you skeptical? In what ways are you not?
  • Comment: "Even determinists and fatalists look both ways before crossing the street."
  • What do you think of "the Empiricist approach to medicine"? (350) Does anyone still practice it?

Skepticism mentioned under last week's quiz...


It’s certainly a long way from “Grand Theft Auto.”

Henry David Thoreau’s classic “Walden” is the inspiration for what Smithsonian Magazine is calling the world’s most improbable video game: “Walden, a Game.”

Instead of offering the thrills of stealing, violence and copious cussing, the new video game, based on Thoreau’s 19th-century retreat in Massachusetts, will urge players to collect arrowheads, cast their fishing pole into a soothing pond, buy penny candies and perhaps even jot notes in a journal — all while listening to the author’s meditations on nature... (continues)

26 comments:

  1. 8 - DQ
    1. When I hear "therapy", I think of exploring the mind. Often therapy can be a restructuring of how you think about and view the world. I do think philosophers can be good therapists, I believe that discussing philosophy requires and open mind, and when you have an open mind, you can discover a lot about yourself and the world.
    3. I think that, if the motion of atoms explains everything, we can still be free. We can participate in the motion, influence and change it - have an active role.
    4. I do believe it is true that your private thoughts can never be enslaved. They are yours to have and think about as you wish. No one else can possibly know or control your private thoughts. They are the epitome of privacy.
    6. I ask myself honestly what can I do about X? If the answer is nothing, I let it go. If the answer is something else, I set about doing what I can. I try really hard not to old onto things that I can not control.

    ReplyDelete
  2. 8 - Quiz Questions
    1. The Stoic system not only enjoined a selfless devotion to the welfare of others, it also..?
    dwelt on the vanity of the world, and on the guiding inner voice of conscience.

    2. What was the Stoics' Nature?
    an earnest intelligence with the serious work of running a universe to do

    3. What was the Epicurean Nature?
    warm-hearted and not averse to a little enjoyment— provided, of course, that it was nothing too indulgent, for this might interfere with the pursuit of more refined and longer-lasting pleasures.

    ReplyDelete
  3. 8 AQQ 2-28
    1.What did some of the Stoics enemies try to strangle
    2.Were the Stoics just as keen as the Epicureans to establish that people were responsible for their own lives?
    3.The Epicureans had simply denied what?
    4.The Epicureans used their random swerve of what to break the chain of physical cause and effect?
    5.Why was Zeno flogging a slave?
    6.What did the slave say about being flogged?
    7.What was Zenos reply to the slave?
    8.Cato was fated to be a what?
    9.Was Caesar fated to be a hero?
    10.What were Zeno and others fated to go on about?
    11.What did the Lazy Argument go like?
    12.Did Chrysippus spot the fallacy in these such arguments?
    13.What was true according to Chrysippus?
    14.What is the answer to the lazy argument?

    ReplyDelete
  4. 8 AQQ 3-2
    1.Real Sceptics do not endorse what?
    2.You cannot catch a real Sceptic out by claiming what?
    3.You cannot hurt a Sceptic with what objection?
    4.A Sceptic puts fowards the alternatives for what reason?
    5.When Sextus cites the large variety of beliefs among different nations he is not trying to demonstrate what?
    6.He is however, trying to unsettle what?
    7.What did Epicurus and Lucretius say about a Sceptic?
    8.Does the Sceptic want a leg to stand on?
    9.What does a Sceptic want to suspend?
    10.What must a Sceptic leave open to question?
    11.What will a Sceptic refuse to make firm assertions about?
    12.A Sceptic will happily say what about things?
    13.Sextus says that Sceptics happily go along with what?
    14.What is the guardian in this case?
    15.What does the guardian cause us to have?
    16.Sextus says that hunger conducts us to what?
    17.Why will a Sceptic lead a fairly conventional existence?
    18.The Sceptics unresisting attitude to everyday observances extends not only to what?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Discussion question responses feb 28
    1. I think of a typical therapist asking questions to someone who needs help. I don't think a philosopher would be a good therapist, I think they would argue too much with the client.
    2. But the happiness of the greatest number of people may not outweigh how the minority may feel. Could this not be seen in white supremacy?
    3. Our minds can.
    4. I don't think so. You can be enslaved by the world we live in. Racist's minds could be enslaved because they have been taught or tricked by society that the way they think is normal.
    5. No.
    6. I think of steps I could take to change something, if there are no steps then I can't change it.

    Alternate quiz questions:
    1. Sextus said the suspension of judgement was only to be applied to what?
    2. Sextus says that Sceptics should happily go along with nature just like what?
    3. Sextus was an advocate of what approach to medicine?
    4. What comparison is made about the arguments Sceptics use to dislodge dogmatic beliefs?

    Alternate discussion questions:
    1. Do advertisements affect the way we think? Can our minds be free if we are constantly seeing advertisements?
    2. What would it take to "free" your mind after growing up in a society like America?
    3. What is a free mind?
    4. How can you free your mind if there are variables you cannot control?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Devin Willis9:37 PM CST

    Devin Willis 8
    1. When I hear the word therapy, I think of a helping hand. Therefore, I do believe that philosophers can be good therapists.
    2. I feel like it is because you want to have as much pleasure as you can in life without having as many painful experiences.
    3. Yes, I believe you will be more free-spirited.
    4. Your private thoughts can never be enslaved.
    6. Things that I cannot personally change or alter are out of my control.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Devin Willis10:19 PM CST

    Devin Willis 8
    1. Pyrrho's lived to be how old?
    2. What is the Jain religion?
    3. Who took over the headship of Plato's academy, just before Phyrrho's death?
    4. The lazy argument aimed to show what?
    5. What practice did Carneades adopt?
    6. What did the Methodist doctors agree with mainstream Empiricists?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 1) 90
      2)Hinduism
      3) Arcesilaus
      4)belief in fate implied that there was no point in doing anything,

      Delete
  8. Sam Rozell
    Section 8
    D.Q. Questions
    1. Hearing the word "therapy" to me brings on the idea of delving into the mind and understanding personal thoughts and beliefs as to how the world works and why certain events have shaped you into the person you are. I do believe philosophers could be considered therapists, as they work to provide answers to the unknown.
    4. Private thoughts can never be enslaved thoughts. They are your thoughts, your beliefs; while their can be challenges to those thoughts, they will never not be your own.
    6. I have to take a step back in order to determine if something is within my control or not. If I can't do anything immediately to control whatever it may be, or be able to control it years from now, I'll let it go and come to the conclusion that it is out of my control.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Clayton Thomas (10)10:33 AM CST

    DQ: 2/28

    1. When I hear the word therapy, I think of people being helped through some situation that has caused them some form of pain (emotionally, physically, or spiritually). I think philosophers could make great therapists because they could help you to examine life as a whole and what it means to live rather than dwell on that small spec of life which is causing the pain.

    2. I think that "the greatest happiness of the greatest number" is not necessarily a good goal to have in life. It could be, but not necessarily. I personally the greatest goal in life is to achieve happiness, and if making 'the greatest number' of people you can happy makes you happy then it is an appropriate goal to have. Otherwise, leave it to those who do care about the greater good and go make yourself happy. I would say this goal cannot be effectively pursued by those who shun involvement in public life because if your ultimate goal is to provide 'the greatest happiness to the greatest number' then you would have to know the greatest number and understand what makes them happy; which, cannot be done if you shun involvement in public life.

    3. Solely going off the idea that atoms do explain everything, then yes we are free. We are free move to move about space and time clashing with some and bonding with others. Which in a sense is kind of what happens. We have atoms in our lives (people) that we like and atoms that we don't. We get close and bond with the ones we like forming compounds of atoms (groups of people), and push the others away.

    4. I would say that it is true that your private cannot be enslaved; however, they can be infatuated with something for awhile that can be hard to forget. We control our private thoughts with no limits simply because no one else will ever know what is going on in your head, which is why they cannot be enslaved, but if some tragic/shocking event were to happen chances are you will think about that thing for awhile. So i would say it can be predictable but not enslaveable.

    5. I would have to disagree with their assessment of Plato's Forms because they say concepts are material things, but I would argue that sometimes concepts are just non-material ideas in the brain. An idea is not a tangible thing, but rather has the form of one. Same with the concept of the soul. It isn't a tangible thing made of material things. It's an idea that people accept to help them accept death and the after life. It takes on this form, but it cannot be proven to exist.

    6. The way i determine if something is out of my control or not is based on the circumstance I am in and any previous circumstance that could've led up to it. You would have to consider every moment up to the moment in question out of your control, because if even one of those was fixable or solvable on your account then the situation was controllable by yourself. Otherwise, it probably wasn't in your control to begin with.

    ReplyDelete
  10. 10
    DQ

    1. When I think of the word therapy I think of a person going to seek help with certain problems they are having in their life with someone who can help them through that by using different methods that are proven to be helpful.

    2. I think you can still be happy if you work for the public, if it something that you are passionate about doing.

    3. I don't think that motion of atoms explains everything, that's kind of a long jump. I don't think the motion of atoms proves if people are free or not either. I believe that people are free to make their own decisions, but usually people will based their decisions on a circumstance where they may feel that their decision making is restricted.

    4. You would think that, but a persons thoughts can be changed and controlled in a way by persuasive people. The may be that person's private thoughts but they are vulnerable to people they may want to change them.

    5. I don't agree with Plato's Theory of forms. Plato appears to be weary of how the reality of things are, because he does not want to accept that the observable world is reality. Due to this his claims do not have a strong foundation because he is basing his claims on what he want the truth to be, and not what observation points too.

    6. Things that are in or not in your control is dependent on how much power you have over that situation, and how many variables are involved.

    ReplyDelete
  11. 10
    1. Hearing the word "therapy," I think of sitting down with someone and discussing your problems, or really just any method of working through your problems and making yourself feel better. I guess philosophers could be good therapists, they may be able to look at things in different ways and give more insight.

    2. I think it would be better to strive to be happy and content. I feel like you also need to be involved in public life and surround yourself with people who love you. That's really what life is all about.

    3. Yes I guess so, because atoms are constantly moving freely and going wherever they want to go.

    4. Yes, I think it's true. They are yours and they are private, no one else can get to them. They're for your consideration only, and it's up to you to choose how to deal with them.

    5. Yes, I do.

    6. I think you have to step back and look at the situation. Sometimes there might be other people involved, so the situation might be out of your control. You also have to think about how your decisions and actions would effect the outcome of a situation, and that might help you to decide if it was in your control or not.

    ReplyDelete
  12. 10

    1) Therapy for me is that a way to reflect our life and have a better understanding of who we're.
    I do think philosophers will be good therapists because they challenge our belief and make us question what we know to broaden our perspective.

    3) Our action are never free. We are controlled by the influence in our environment.

    4) With a lot of meditation and concentration, it can be controlled. The only time our private thoughts escape us is when we get distracted.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Devin Willis12:19 AM CST

    Devin Willis 8
    1. No it is not possible because you will be clueless and always indecisive, which will make life harder than what it has to be.
    2. Epicurus because Pyrrho's logic behind senses is completely insane and will get me killed.
    3. I am skeptical because I think for myself and come up with my own analogies, however I do believe in certain norms and standards in society.
    4. Everyone cares for their life and will not voluntarily destroy it.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Maddy Russell 10
    DQ
    1. I think it is possible to live your life by not committing to anything. I do not think this a desirable life and it id definitely not useful to do so. You would live your life in sort of bubble, not committing or feeling anything.
    2.Epicurus because for me it makes more sense logically.
    3.I am skeptical of some social norms, like religion. But in most things I follow norms and am not skeptical.
    4. Even if you think death is inevitable, you still care for your own life and do not want to give it up.
    5. It is the idea that you learn through experience and not necessarily through science.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Maddy Russell 10
    Quiz Questions
    1. What kind of doctor agreed with main stream Empiricists?
    2. What did Sextus compare Septics ability to go along with to?
    3. According to Sextus, why do people become Sceptics?
    4. Who took over the headship of Plato's Academy after Pyrrho's death?
    5. According to Sceptics, what is worth suspending for a quiet life?
    6. What did Sextus point out about hearing everyone's argument about some question?
    7. What does Scepticism apply to?
    8. What did Epicurus and Lucretius say about Sceptics?

    ReplyDelete
  16. 1. I don't think it's possible to live a fulfilling life questioning everything. It causes us to miss opportunities to explore the world and invest in new opportunities in life. It's possible, but not desirable.
    2. Epicurus'. Pyrroh's logic is extreme, honestly too much for me to handle and actually survive.
    3. I question quite a few things in life. Why things are the way they are and if the decisions I make are the best. I rely on everything around me to make conclusions, however, rather than ignoring my senses because they are deemed "unreliable" by traditional sceptics.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Alexus Uqdah 8
    DQ
    -I don't believe it is possible to go through life that way because there will always be something you forget to doubt or commit to. And no I don't think this is useful or desirable.

    -I find Epicurus's view more persuasive. Pyrrho's view is too extreme for me.

    -I guess I tend to be more skeptical of things that are new to me. However, I don't question things I have been taught when I was younger and I guess that can be the wrong outtake on things, but for example, I don't question my religious beliefs.

    -I hope they would. I don't know anyone that wouldn't. I think everyone cares enough about their own life to not want walk into death.

    -I don't think it would work in today's society and I don't think anyone still practices that belief.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Clayton Thomas (10)10:32 AM CST

    3/2: DQ

    1. I would argue that it is possible for for one to doubt and commit to nothing; however, I would also say that this a futile effort to try and do so for two reasons: 1) it is not useful for application in society because you will never be able to make your own decisions without doubting them and couldn't be told what to do without doubting them so you'd be stuck in an vicious cycle, and 2) it is not desirable to walk around doubting everything and not even forming your own opinions because you would just doubt your opinions which leads to uninteresting conversations and constant reassurance by the other party since you have so much doubt and eventually that other party will get tired of constantly reassuring you. So i would say yes it's possible, but I would advise against pursuing it.

    2. I think Epicurus sums up the senses perfectly, "If you fight against all sensations, you will not have a standard against which to judge even those of them you say are mistaken". In this, it seems like Epicurus is trying to say that without any falsities there can be no truth, so one must know what to base his assessment on before he can make the assessment, which seems like sound logic to me.

    3. There are many accepted ideas and various traditions practiced that I highly question because of their nature (such as certain political views and religious ideas just to name a few); however, I am not a complete skeptic because I do have my own set of accepted opinions and values I follow, but their are plenty I question.

    4. Whether you see the glass as half full or half empty, you still have to look at the glass of liquid to make your assessment. Your assessment of this liquid is completely subjective, but without a glass holding some liquid it can't be half full or empty, it is just nonexistent.

    5. I think, especially for the time period and lack of technology, that the Empiricist approach to medicine was extremely plausible. They practiced the idea of observing what works to fight what, and what doesn't work through tests and just go from their until they developed a system of what cured what and what didn't. Which, for not having technology to run tests and know exactly or with better precision what will work, this was a great way to practice I feel. I would hope no one practices this because of our knowledge of medicine now and how precise we can make treatments, however new things arise and sometimes the only to determine if something will work or not is trial and error.

    Alternate DQ:

    1. Why do you think people followed the Sceptic ideals and refuse to commit themselves to anything?

    2. Can one practice ataraxia without becoming a Sceptic? Why?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 1. Its seems to be a safe way to live. If you don't have any opinions no one can fault you for them.

      2. In a way yes, because sceptic refuse to old an opinion which is supposed to alleviate the mind, you can reach the state without giving up any beliefs

      Delete
  19. 10- D.Q responses:

    1.) it is possible to go through life being a consistent skeptic, but i personally see no reason or benefit in doing so. It's a waste of time and waste of a life to not accept anything and deny everything.

    2.) Epicurus make more sense and is more logical to me than Pyrroh's useless and undesirable lifestyle and logic.

    3.) I am not very skeptical at all, rather open-minded. I am firm on my beliefs and decisions ( most of the time ) but will not take a skeptic form of approach on different things and deem everything untrue and/or impossible.

    4.) whether you are a determinist or a fatalist, as human beings, either have a sense of caution on decisions/actions they make in life.

    5.) I think it is the approach to medicine through experience in the particular field. I think some still use this approach, of course not the the extent Sextus did, but rather through experience through practice.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Is it possible to go through life questioning and doubting everything, committing always to nothing, and holding no firm opinions? Is it desirable or useful to try doing so?
    * I don't believe so, but I'm sure people have tried to live such a way. I do think that living this way does have some benefit though I believe that it is impossible to be without any firm opinions. Still thinking this way does free the mind to new idea

    Whose view on the reliability of the senses do you find more persuasive, Pyrrho's or Epicurus's (see DR 309-10)
    *Epicurus

    In what ways are you skeptical? In what ways are you not?
    *I'm skeptical in the ways of people and humanity. Though this could be seen more as pessimism then anything.

    Comment: "Even determinists and fatalists look both ways before crossing the street."
    * People rarely want to end their lives by making a stupid mistake. Therefore we take precaution to stop ourselves from doing things like that.

    What do you think of "the Empiricist approach to medicine"? (350) Does anyone still practice it?
    *No!!

    ReplyDelete
  21. 10
    1. No, I don't think it's possible to go through life without caring about anything and doubting everything. You need to commit, you need to have roots and trust people, have your own opinions and be able to stand up for yourself. I don't think it's desirable or useful at all to live that way.

    2. I find Epicurus's view much more reliable. You do have to trust your senses, they are really all you have to give you your perception of everyday life, so you need to rely on and trust them.

    3. I think I can be skeptical when it comes to people that I don't know, it takes me a little while to fully trust people.

    4. I think at the end of the day you have a natural instinct to protect yourself and preserve your life. You can preach all you want that you are leaving your life to fate and whatever happens happens, but at the end of the day your first reaction is always to protect yourself.

    5. I don't think it's a very smart approach to medicine, and it is not practiced anymore.

    ReplyDelete
  22. DQ
    10

    1. I feel like it is possible, But always questioning and doubting seems like a commitment to always be confused, which I don't think would be very desirable if you prefer not to be confused about every aspect of how things work.

    2. I consider Epicurus's to be more persuasive.

    3. When I'm skeptical about somethings it's usually based on the consistency of how something has worked or not in the past, and I am skeptical about things when they seem to be going against what I consider to be more accurate based on the facts that have been collected.

    4. I think think everyone that considers them self to be a fatalist would jump in front of a moving car. Fatalists I don't think are more suicidal in that way, more in that they won't go out their way to kill themselves that directly. They would more likely be heavy drinkers and just accepting that they will probably die early from it and not caring because we are all going to die anyways. I think it's more like that rather them intentionally seeking ways to kills themselves. This is based on people that I have talked to that consider themselves to be fatalists.

    5. I think it is not the best approach to medicine, and I'm sure a minority group of people still practice it

    ReplyDelete
  23. Caroline Pyles2:10 PM CST

    Discussion responses March 2:
    1. It could be possible but i don't think anyone in today's world would do it to the extent that Pyrrho did.
    2. Epicurus
    3. I'm very skeptical about how other people's minds work vs my own. I'll never be able to know how other people think, so i'll never know if what i think is "normal".
    4. I think it's true. No one wants to or is willing to die except Pyrrho.
    5. I'm sure some people still practice it... maybe not very successfully.

    Alternate discussion questions:
    1. If we are to not care about anything, do we not build relationships either?
    2. How can you live your whole life questioning everything without going mad while questioning your own mind?
    3. Is scepticism practical for students?

    ReplyDelete
  24. 10

    1) It is a good idea to question most things because when we try to answer the question it will help us understand life better but it is not practical to question everything. It is useful in a way but the risk out weighs the usefulness.

    3) I'm a skeptic until I'm given sufficient data or reasoning about anything. I usually trust my senses, but question them one third of the time. The only thing I'm not skeptic about things I've experienced, once I know something is painful I will never question myself if that thing is painful ever again.

    4) As much as we try to be skeptic, we've involuntary actions. Our senses will always try to protect us from any danger that we know of. It takes a lot of effort to jump into danger knowing it is dangerous.

    ReplyDelete