FOUNDATIONS

Question 1

Philosophical presuppositions

Answer 1

Beliefs which provide the foundation for everything one believes, with constitute the real basis for ones attitudes, words, and actions.

Question 2

Logical Conclusions

Answer 2

The results, or outcomes, which will occur as a result of living consistently and coherently with one’s philosophical presuppositions.

Question 3

Line Of Despair (Thanatos Syndrome)

Answer 3

The gulf, chasm, or abyss in terms of one’s philosophy which arises when one’s philosophical presuppositions are reviled to be erroneous, destructive, and deadly

Question 4

Absolute Proof

Answer 4

Evidence and interpretation of the evidence leaves an absolute zero margin for error. 


Question 5

Conclusive Proof

Answer 5

When evidence and interpretation makes it absolutely reasonable to accept a position and unreasonable to reject it. Qualitative vs quantitative arguments.

Question 6

Empirical Claims

Answer 6

Proposed truths concerning physical reality. (5 senses)


Question 7

Analytical Claims

Answer 7

Proposed truth concerning words and their meaning.


Question 8

Value Claims

Answer 8

Truths concerning what one should be or what one should do
.

Question 9

Metaphysical Claims

Answer 9

(other end of empirical) Truths concerning non-physical, transcendent reality.


Question 10

-PRINCIPLES OF LOGIC-

INTUITIVE PRINCIPLES:

Law of Identity

Answer 10

Everything that exists has a specific nature. Has characteristics that are part of what it is.

Question 11

-PRINCIPLES OF LOGIC-

INTUITIVE PRINCIPLES:

Law of Noncontradiction

Answer 11

Two propositions, if they contradict each other, cannot both be true.

Question 12

-PRINCIPLES OF LOGIC-

INTUITIVE PRINCIPLES:

The Law of the Excluded Middle

Answer 12

(Mutually exclusive claims) Either a proposition or its negative is true.

Question 13

-PRINCIPLES OF LOGIC-

INTUITIVE PRINCIPLES:

The Law Of Verification

Answer 13

A proposition must be willing to face the same criteria that it demands for the claim that it opposes.

Question 14

-PRINCIPLES OF LOGIC-

INTUITIVE PRINCIPLES:

The Law of Cogito(ergo sum)

Answer 14

Two self evident claims, the counter claims to each are self-contradictory

Question 15

-PRINCIPLES OF LOGIC-

PROBABILISTIC PRINCIPLES:

The Immutability of Math throughout the Universe

Answer 15

3 is always 3 and can never be two or four.

Question 16

-PRINCIPLES OF LOGIC-

PROBABILISTIC PRINCIPLES:

The Immutability of physical laws throughout the Universe

Answer 16

Gravity is always gravity and conformed to gravitational principles.

Question 17

EPISTEMOLOGICAL APPROACHES TO MORAL AND ETHICAL DECISION MAKING:

MAJORITY OPINION

Answer 17

The Beliefe that the opinions and actions of the majority of individuals in the group constitute a bases for determining what is true and right.

Question 18

EPISTEMOLOGICAL APPROACHES TO MORAL AND ETHICAL DECISION MAKING:

Genetic Programing & Socialization Processes (Nature/Nurture - Presupposition & Conditioning

Answer 18

Genetic Conditioning determines what is true and right. (Its just who I am)


Question 19

EPISTEMOLOGICAL APPROACHES TO MORAL AND ETHICAL DECISION MAKING:

PERSONAL INTUITION (Feeling & Mystical Enlightenment)

Answer 19

Personal feeling, inner “knowing,” mystical impressions, and individual intuition are a valid basis for determining what is true and right.

Question 20

EPISTEMOLOGICAL APPROACHES TO MORAL AND ETHICAL DECISION MAKING:

EXTERNAL, OBJECTIVE REVELATION (Metaphysical Encounter)

Answer 20

A metaphysical source for knowledge and guidance is preferable as a source for determining what is rue and right.

Question 21

FALLACIES IN INDUCTIVE LOGIC:

APPEAL TO AUTHORITY

Answer 21

The attempt to show that a positions should be accepted by drawing attention to the fact that a popular and well-known figure seems to support this position. (relevance issue)


Question 22

FALLACIES IN INDUCTIVE LOGIC:

AD HOMINEM (against the man)

Answer 22

Attempt to discredit a position by attacking a person associated with said position. (relevance issue)


Question 23

FALLACIES IN INDUCTIVE LOGIC:

ARGUMENT FROM ANALOGY

Answer 23

The attempt to gain support for a position by making and unfair comparisons between two things, the purpose of witch is to give the appearance of a relationship where there is none. (relevance issue)

Question 24

FALLACIES IN INDUCTIVE LOGIC:

ARGUMENT FROM FORCE

Answer 24

Attempt is made to gain support from a position and compliance to demands by threatening physical and/or non-physical harm. This approach operated from a “bully” mentality, as though the power to harm someone proves the validity of ones position. (relevance issue)


Question 25

FALLACIES IN INDUCTIVE LOGIC:

ARGUMENT FROM IGNORANCE/ARGUMENT FROM SILENCE

Answer 25

Support for a position is based upon the argument that because no opposition is voiced or because one has no information concerning opposition the position must be valid. (quantitative issue)

Question 26

FALLACIES IN INDUCTIVE LOGIC:

CIRCULAR ARGUMENT

Answer 26

Circular fallacy is a type of reasoning in which the proposition is supported by the premises, which is supported by the proposition, creating a circle in reasoning where no useful information is being shared. The attempt is made to gain support for a position by providing a support statement that proves nothing because its basic argument is that it is true because it is true. (relevance issue)

Question 27

FALLACIES IN INDUCTIVE LOGIC:

EQUIVOCATION

Answer 27

The act of switching the meaning of a word to another meaning the the middle of the discourse without signaling that a change in meaning is occurring.


An attempt is made to gain support for a position by using language that on the surface is appealing to an audience. (Clarification issue)

Question 28

FALLACIES IN INDUCTIVE LOGIC:

FALSE CAUSE (Ergo Propter Hoc or Post Hoc)

Answer 28

This approach argues conclusions which do not reasonably occur from the preceding conditions. The attempt is made to give the appearance of causation where there is non. (relevance issue)

Question 29

FALLACIES IN INDUCTIVE LOGIC:

HASTY/OVER-GENERALIZATION

Answer 29

Attempt to win support for a position by appealing to one example, or an extremely small group, which lacks the scope necessary to make the support credible. (quantitative issue)

Question 30

FALLACIES IN INDUCTIVE LOGIC:

SLIPPERY SLOPE

Answer 30

An extended false cause, in which supposed effects, or results, tend to “snowball” out of control, without demonstrating a reasonable connection between the “cause” and the presumed “effects.” (relevance issue)

Question 31

TERMS:

Ontology

Answer 31

The branch of metaphysics dealing with the nature of being.

Question 32

TERMS:

Metaphysics

Answer 32

The branch of philosophy that deals with the first principles of things, including abstract concepts such as being, knowing, substance, cause, identity, time, and space.

Question 33

TERMS:

Teleology

Answer 33

The explanation of phenomena in terms of the purpose they serve rather than of the cause by which they arise.