Answer 20 Philosophy Questions

brief answer 20 philosophy questions BASED ON CHAPTER 13 &14. Textbook info: Philosophy A Historical Survey with Essential Readings, by Fisher and Stumpf Study Questions 1.Kant held a middle ground between rationalism and empiricism. Describe what that middle-ground position is and whether you think his position is preferable to that of either the rationalists or the empiricists. 2.Philosophers commonly claim that mathematical statements such as “5 plus 7 equals 12” are “analytical a priori,” that is, true by definition and known without experience. Kant, though, argued that mathematical statements are “synthetic a priori,” that is, non-experiential knowledge that is not true by definition. Explain the difference between synthetic a priori and analytical a priori, and which of these you think mathematical statements fall under. 3.Explain Kant’s “forms of intuition” and “categories of thought” and how they spontaneously organize data from experience. 4.Explain Kant’s distinction between the phenomenal and the noumenal realms. 5.There is a skeptical way of looking at Kant’s philosophy: our knowledge is trapped within the phenomenal realm and how our mind organizes experi-ences through “forms of intuition” and “categories of thought.” But these are only products of our mind, sort of like secondary qualities, and may not resemble actual objects in the noumenal world at all. How might Kant respond to this criticism? 6.According to Kant, antinomies arise when we try to push reasoning about the self, the cosmos, or God beyond our limited capacities and into the nou-menal realm. Explain the points of conflict in each of these antinomies. 7.Kant argued that the traditional proofs for God’s existence failed. Pick one of these proofs, explain Kant’s critique, and discuss whether you agree with Kant. 8.Kant held that true moral commands cannot be expressed as hypotheti-cal imperatives, but only as categorical imperatives. Explain the difference between these two types of imperatives and discuss whether moral com-mands could be properly expressed as hypothetical imperatives, contrary to Kant’s claim