Topics for Exam #2 MINITERM

Click here for the topics for Exam #2.

second assignment, philosophy paper (T,R classes)

click here for the second assignment of our philosophy paper.

list of student assistants (T,R classes)

T,R 825am

Yanara Cruz Gomez
Otari Oliva
Yamil Robles
Anastasiya Shulhan

T,R 11:15am

Rohama Bruk
Gabriel Conte Cortes
Estela Rivera

why is 7+5=12 synthetic apriori

Why does 7+5=12 is considered "synthetic a priori" by Kant?

"7," "5," "+" is not

According to Kant, analytic statements really tell us nothing new about the world.

All triangles have three sides.

You can see that this is simply a structural relationship between subject and predicate. They are "analytic" in the sense that the predicate can be found by analyzing the meaning of the subject.  

All bodies are extended. 

Again, analytic because part of the definition of a body is that it occupies space (which is what "extended" means here).

Synthetic statements, on the other hand, assert more of a thing than is already contained in the definition of that thing. 

They "synthesize" one concept with another, and tell us that they are found together in some specific thing.

All bodies are heavy. 

Is "ampliative," in that it conveys new information about bodies that is not contained in the very concept of that thing. "Having weight" is not part of the definition of "occupying space."

section 2.5 biological naturalism (all classes)

for biological naturalism click here.

Humans Need Not Apply

Check this sobering video about bots vs. humans (via Jules Juvensen)

China plowing ahead of the US in A.I. (as per section 2.3, this is your chance students to change the future)

Read this article in the NYTimes.

For decades, artificial intelligence was more fiction than science. In the past few years, however, dramatic improvements have prompted some of the biggest companies in Silicon Valley and Detroit — and China — to invest billions on everything from self-driving cars to home appliances that can have a conversation with a human. A.I. has also become a significant part of national defense policy as military leaders and ethicists debate how much autonomy we should give to weapons that can think for themselves.

POSSIBLE WORDS

This is a great introduction to possible-worlds logic.

List of student assistants HONORS

MWF 10am

Emily Gil
Thalia Iturriaga
Madheline Almanzar

MWF 11am

Matheus Decamargo
Alban Allajbegu
Lucas Rengifo-Keller
Guoda Terleckaite

Interamerican

Ernesto Garcia
Maria Paula Guerra-Chavez
Jonathan Jimenez
Keyshla Negron

First assignment, philosophy paper HONORS CLASSES (due in a week)

Here are the topics for your philosophy paper. And here is the proposal template for you to use. 

First paper assignment T,R 8:25am and 11:15am classes (due in a week)

Pick a topic from these topics.  And present a proposal like this.

why is 7+5 =12 synthetic apriori?

find the answer here.

MCD Wolfson Philosophy Club + members

Board
Rosa Montes, President
Ever Francisco Rodriguez, Vice President
Cindy Coleman, Treasurer
Merlyn Myton, Secretary 

Members
1. Alejandro Cañizares
2. Roushil Alamudi
3.Javier Canizares
4. Melissa Cruz
5.Peter Croxton
6. Nicole Sepetauc
7.Modesto Valdes
8. Kevin Carvel
9. Jeff Castro

(more members will be added as they sign up)

Topics for Exam #1 Miniterm

Find the topics for review for quiz 1 here.

In addition, here is the Website to your textbook Doing Philosophy. It contains quizzes, flash cards, etc. Play with it and grade yourself.

Remember to bring your own scantron #888-P or #882-E 

one more note about Spinoza (honors wolfson 11am)

something about proving the most perfect being, this is Anselm's proof. pretty good REDUCTIO.* here it goes:

a) G is a being such that none greater can be imagined,
b) G exists as an idea in the mind (Gm),
c) if G exists as an idea in the mind and in reality, then ceteris paribus this union is greater than a being that exists only as an idea in the mind. we have,

GmUGr >Gm   (U means union) do you agree? now comes a conditional:

d) if G existed only in the mind, then we can imagine something that is greater than God (that is, a greatest possible being that does exist),

given Gm (alone) then we can imagine a Gk > G 

But we cannot imagine something that is greater than God because of (a)
Therefore, God exists.
__________
*Reductio is a great tool to prove axioms.

Is this question ambiguous?

Alice decides to invest in a mutual fund recommended by her best friend Nancy... 

my answer here:

trigonometry is more than 3,700 years old!

babylonians were pretty smart, not to mention they produced amazing architecture and gardens. you have to love babylonians.

LNIC (law of non-intended consequences) or we're condemned to mess up our future

I brought up the issue of LNIC with Modernity & global warming. It seems we warmed the planet. we didn't intend it. We had different ideas. The conclusion is that some of our technological wonders become problems of the future. With sea level rise we have another mounting problem. The sinking of our cities. Read this wonderful NYTimes article about New Orleans. Then extrapolate what you read to nearby Key West.

Philosophy Club's Government and a Constitution

Our Wolfson's MDC Philosophy Government.

Our Philosophy Club Constitution. 

Amanda Corbo's Review for Exam (better than mine)

Click here for Amanda's Review.

BEST CONSENSUS (why wine matters here) interamerican honors class

this is a great site for wine lovers (sponsored by the NYTimes)

clearly you shouldn't drink wine if you're not of age.

I upload the post only to make clear how complicated is the issue of BEST CONSENSUS, after our discussion. Yes, it's your fault, Mariantonieta (just kidding).

My point was that reflective knowledge needs skill, which is something we constantly build. We have to start somewhere. First, you learn the consensus.

First meeting of the Philosophy Club: March 6, room 3327 @ 1pm!

Trending topic: Ethical vegetarianism

To be honest: I love a good lamb roast, but wait. Ethical vegetarians make a compelling point. They say that the reasons for not hurting or killing animals are quite similar to the reasons for not hurting or killing humans. They go on to say that consuming a living creature just for its taste, or for convenience -even out of habit- is not justifiable. Why? Because we are a morally conscious species. 

DISCUSSING THIS TOPIC IS ONE WAY TO FIND OUT.