final deck

Question 1

Constructive Empiricism

Answer 1

A theory is empirically adequate if and only if its predictions match past and potential observations.

Question 2

JTB Account of Knowledge

Answer 2

Definition:
S knows that p if and only if:

S believes p,
p is true, and
S is justified in believing p.

Question 3

Realism vs. Anti-Realism About Scientific Theories

Answer 3

Scientific Realism: A scientific theory is correct if the entities it posits really exist and behave as described.
Scientific Anti-Realism: A scientific theory is correct if it accurately predicts observable phenomena.

Question 4

Correspondence Theory of Truth

Answer 4

A statement is true if and only if it corresponds to the facts.

Question 5

Verificationism

Answer 5

Definition:

p is true if and only if it is provable by available means of proof.
Verificationist Anti-Realism: A theory is correct only if its statements can be proven.

Question 6

Coherence Theory of Truth

Answer 6

Definition:
A statement p is true if adding p to a background body of beliefs increases overall coherence.

Coherentist Anti-Realism: A theory is correct if its statements cohere with each other.

Question 7

Foundationalism

Answer 7

Definition:

There are basic beliefs that do not rely on other beliefs for justification.
Other beliefs are justified if they derive from basic beliefs.

Question 8

Coherentism

Answer 8

Definition:
A belief is justified if it coheres (mutually supports) with the subject’s other beliefs.

Question 9

Reliabilism

Answer 9

Definition:
A belief is justified if it is formed through a reliable method that generates true beliefs.

Question 10

Internalism vs. Externalism

Answer 10

(Justification)
Internalism: Justification factors must be internal to the subject’s conscious life.
Externalism: Justification factors can be external to the subject’s conscious awareness.

Question 11

Reductio Arguments

Answer 11

Definition:
A reductio ad absurdum argument proves a statement by assuming the opposite and deriving a contradiction

Question 12

Validity

Answer 12

Definition:
An argument is valid if it is impossible for the premises to be true while the conclusion is false.

Question 13

Soundness

Answer 13

Definition:
An argument is sound if:

It is valid, and
All its premises are true.

Question 14

Non-Ampliative Reasoning

Answer 14

Definition:
Reasoning where the conclusion is already guaranteed by the premises.

Question 15

Ampliative Reasoning

Answer 15

Definition:
Reasoning where the conclusion extends beyond what is strictly guaranteed by the premises.

Question 16

Holism

Answer 16

Definition:
Justification for a belief depends on its relation to a network of other beliefs.

Question 17

Underdetermination

Answer 17

Definition:
The data supporting a theory can equally support rival theories.

Strong Underdetermination: There is never a rational reason to prefer one theory over another.

Weak Underdetermination: There is sometimes no rational reason to prefer one theory over another.

Question 18

Defeasible Justification

Answer 18

Definition:
Justification that can be overturned by new evidence but is still initially justified.

Question 19

Infallibilism vs. Fallibilism

Answer 19

Infallibilism: Knowledge requires justification that excludes the possibility of being false.

Fallibilism: Knowledge is possible even if justification allows for the possibility of error.

Question 20

Skepticism

Answer 20

Definition:
We can have no knowledge about a specific subject matter.

Question 21

Relevant Alternatives Account of Knowledge

Answer 21

Definition:
S knows p if p is true in all epistemically relevant worlds compatible with S’s evidence.

Question 22

Contextualism

Answer 22

Definition:
The standard for knowledge shifts depending on the context.

Question 23

Necessary and Sufficient Conditions

Answer 23

Definition:

Necessary: If p, then q must be true.
Sufficient: If q is true, then p is guaranteed

Question 24

Counterfactual Conditionals

Answer 24

Definition:
“If A had not happened, B would not have happened.”

Question 25

Hume’s View of Causation

Answer 25

Definition:
All ideas come from sense impressions. We can observe events but not causal relations.

Question 26

Causal Pluralism

Answer 26

Definition:
There is no single account of what it means for X to cause Y.

Question 27

Realism and Anti-Realism in Mathematics

Answer 27

Realism: Mathematical statements are true if they describe mind-independent mathematical facts.
Platonism: Numbers are non-physical, mind-independent objects.

Intuitionism: A mathematical statement is true only if it is provable.

Structuralism: Mathematics is about abstract patterns, not objects.

Question 28

Supervenience

Answer 28

Definition:
X-facts supervene on Y-facts if there cannot be a change in X without a change in Y.

Question 29

Causal Influence

Answer 29

Definition:
Event C influences event E if changing C leads to changes in E.

Question 30

Strawson on Causation

Answer 30

Definition:
We do observe specific causal relations, not abstract ones.

Question 31

Law of the Excluded Middle (LEM)

Answer 31

Definition:
For any statement p, either p is true, or its negation (¬p) is true:
p ∨ ¬p

Question 32

Proof by Reductio

Answer 32

Definition:
To prove p, assume ¬p, derive a contradiction, and conclude p.

Question 33

Interventionism

Answer 33

Definition:
Causation is analyzed in terms of the effects of manipulating variables in a causal graph.

Question 34

One-to-One Correspondence

Answer 34

Definition:
A relation where each element in one set corresponds to exactly one element in another set.