Orange Coast College

Orange Coast College Philosophy 110 Homework #1 Fall 2017 Due Date: November 16, 2017

Instructor David Kelsey This homework covers lectures 1-5 Version D

Part 1:

Question: Is the following an argument? If so, what are the premises and what is the conclusion of the argument. Whatever we believe, we think agreeable to reason, and, on that account, yield our assent to it. Whatever we disbelieve, we think contrary to reason, and, on that account, dissent from it. Reason ought then to be allowed to be the principle by which our belief and opinions are regulated. Thomas Reid, Essays on the Active Powers of Man

Question: What is the issue discussed in the following passage: …If minds are immaterial, then, we cannot see or touch or otherwise perceive any mind but our own mind, of which we seem to be directly aware. But, then, how do we know that other bodies are really, as is our body, animated by minds at all? Perhaps our mind is the only mind in the world, and every other being seemingly like us is just some sort of automaton? ...Even if we are convinced of a world external to our own minds, how can we know that there are minds lying behind these other human bodies?

Question: Identify the premises and conclusion in the following argument: It’s high time professional boxing was outlawed. Boxing almost always leads to brain damage, and anything that does that ought to be done away with. Besides, it supports organized crime.

Question: True or False, both valid arguments and cogent arguments are inductive. (Please explain your answer.)

Question: supply a universal principle that turns the following into a valid deductive argument: Tony is a great person so he deserves great respect.

Exercise 5-21 #s: 18, 21, 24

Chapter 6: #s 47, 69, 74, 82

Chapter 7: # 42

1 Part 2: Formalize the argument seen in the following passage: The first and more manifest way is the argument from motion. It is certain and evident to our senses that some things are in motion.[1] Whatever is in motion is moved by another, for a thing can be in motion only if it has a potentiality for that towards which it is being moved, while a thing moves insofar as it is actual.[2] For “motion” means the reduction of something from a state of potentiality into a state of actuality.[3] But a thing can be reduced from a state of potentiality into a state of actuality only by something already in a state of actuality… Therefore, whatever is in motion must be put in motion by another.[4] If that by which it is put in motion is itself put in motion, then this also must be put in motion by another, and that by another again. This cannot go on to infinity, because then there would be no first mover, and, consequently, no other movers— since subsequent movers only move insofar as they are put in motion by the first mover… it is necessary to arrive at a first mover, put in motion by no other, and this everyone understands to be God.