Philosophy M.A. students must either pass a departmentally administered General Examination or take an additional course which meets the 8000-level requirement. Each question is graded by two members of the Department and, if necessary, a third resolves any disagreement between first two graders. The General Examination contains three parts: Ancient, Modern and Contemporary. If a student fails any part of the examination s/he need retake only that part. The exam (or a part of it) may be repeated once following a minimum interval of three months. A student may make no more than two attempts at each part of the exam. If the student does not pass all parts after two attempts at each part, the student must take an additional course which meets the 8000-level requirement indicated above.
The Department has prepared a list of eight questions in each part, for a total of 24 questions.
Four questions from each part are selected at random and the student is required to answer two
from each part. So the student answers a total of six questions. Forty-five minutes are allowed
for each question. The questions are below. While many books cover the answers to these questions,
the Department has verified that all the answers are in four volumes of the Blackwell Companions series:
A Companion to the Philosophers, Robert Arrington, ed.
A Companion to Ethics, Peter Singer, ed.
A Companion to Epistemology, Jonathan Dancy & Ernest Sosa, eds.
A Companion to Metaphysics, Jaegwon Kim & Ernest Sosa, eds.
The exam may taken at any time and students need not take all parts at the same time. To schedule the exam, contact the director of graduate studies.
I. Ancient and Medieval
1. Select two of the following philosophers: Anaximander, Heraclitus, Parmenides, and Democritus. Describe their metaphysical positions, provide some of the reasons they advanced in support of those positions, and critically compare them.
2. Give an account of Plato's Theory of Forms. Include some of his reasons for postulating such entities as well as some of the later criticisms of his theory (either by Plato himself or by Aristotle).
3. Compare and contrast Plato's (in the Phaedo and Republic) and Socrates' (in the early dialogues) views about the soul. What were the functions of the soul and its role in human life? Is the soul immortal? What reasons did Plato have for developing his tripartite account in the Republic?
4. Explain Aristotle's distinction between matter and form. Include some discussion of the differences between artifacts and living organisms and the role of matter and form in different sorts of change. What problems is the distinction meant to solve? How is it similar to and how different from Plato's concept of form?
5. What is Aristotle's conception of happiness (eudaimonia) and how does he defend his claim that it is objectively correct? Provide some description of its components and how his views in Nicomachean Ethics Book I seem to differ from his account in Book X.
6. The Stoics, Epicureans, and Skeptics develop in different ways philosophical positions of "ethical invulnerability" in which the agent's goal in life happiness is to an enormous extent within the control of the agent. Describe in general the position of each of these schools and compare their success at achieving such a position without sacrificing its intuitive plausibility.
7. Compare and contrast the conceptions of human nature held by Augustine and Aquinas. Now discuss the impact these views of human nature have on each author's views on any one of the following topics: free will, the problem of evil, political philosophy.
8. State and explain Anselm's argument for the existence of God. Do the same for one of Aquinas's "Five Ways". Discuss the strengths and weaknesses of each of these two proofs.
II. Modern
1. Explain Descartes' theory of dualistic interactionism, and present at least one argument which led him to this position. Briefly survey the principal reaction to his account with respect to the problem of interaction.
2. Describe, in as much detail as you can, the character of Spinoza's God. In your answer, explain why Spinoza is a pantheist, a monist, a parallelist and a determinist.
3. Leibniz's concept of substance gives rise to a number of problems. Briefly describe what Leibniz takes substance to be, and show how acceptance of this view gives rise to two problems.
4. Compare and contrast the political philosophies of Hobbes and Locke. How are they alike, and how are they dissimilar? What are the principal strengths and weaknesses of each view?
5. Present in detail Berkeley's arguments supporting his thesis that "Esse est Percipi." Do you think that Samuel Johnson, in his famous "Thus I refute Berkeley" (by kicking the stone), understood Berkeley? Why or why not?
6. Briefly describe Hume's causal theory and show how acceptance of this theory led Hume to the problem of induction.
7. Define 'Analytic judgment', 'Synthetic judgment', 'A priori knowledge' and 'A posteriori knowledge'. Most philosophers would claim that only analytic judgments can be known as a priori. Why? How and why does Kant try to show that there can be synthetic a priori knowledge?
8. What is the categorical imperative? What, for Kant, is its use? How may Kant's moral views be criticized?
III. Contemporary
The questions for the contemporary section are intentionally "open ended." There is no one single way that you are expected to address these questions. All of the questions could be addressed equally well by students who are trained in different areas of contemporary philosophy and are familiar with different aspects of the contemporary literature. It is the responsibility of each student confronting one of these questions to narrow the question and define it in a manner suited to his or her interest. The way you define the question should be made clear in your answer. By "contemporary" we mean "after Kant."
You should not, however, answer two questions in a very similar manner. For example, do not use the views of the very same philosopher to answer two different questions.
1. What is it for humans to know something? Develop one contemporary view of human knowledge (e.g., knowledge is justified true belief, knowledge is understanding, or knowledge is insight) and explain how, on that view, knowledge is obtained. Discuss one or more possible objections to that view and evaluate the adequacy of the view in light of the objections.
2. Discuss one of the prominent contemporary philosophical analyses of language (e.g., Husserl, Russell, Wittgenstein, Derrida, Searle). Explain, according to that analysis, the function of language and how it accomplishes that function.
3. How is religious language to be understood? Are religious texts to be evaluated in terms of their literal meaning, or in terms of a metaphorical meaning? Discuss the views of one contemporary philosopher or theologian (e.g., Ayer, Bultmann, Tillich, Otto, Wisdom, Ricoeur), and defend or criticize that person's point of view.
4. Explain why you think there is, or is not, an incompatibility between "All events are caused" and "Some actions are free." In developing your answer, make reference to (describe) the three classical positions of Hard Determinism, Libertarianism (Indeterminism), and Soft Determinism. To evaluate the question of any incompatibility, you will also need to elucidate different conceptions of moral responsibility.
5. Explain why you believe that consciousness (or certain critical aspects thereof, to be defined) is, or is not, logically and/or contingently identical with certain brain states or patterns of behavior. Develop at least two arguments in favor of your position. Your essay will require clarification of at least several of the following theories: dualism (substance or property); behaviorism, materialism (any of several versions of identity theory); or functionalism.
6. Marxism, liberalism, communitarianism, and libertarianism represent four major contemporary approaches to thinking about the proper role of government. Explain the perspective of one of these positions (perhaps focusing on one thinker who exhibits the approach) and examine one or more of the serious objections that could be raised to that approach. Can these objections be dealt with in a satisfactory manner?
7. Much discussion in 20th century philosophy has been devoted to the question of whether (moral) "good" can be defined. Present and explain the position of naturalism, intuitionism, noncognitivism, or existentialism with respect to this issue. Consider possible objections to that position and argue either for or against the position in light of the objections.
8. Explain how the basic normative principle(s) of one major ethical tradition (such as deontology, utilitarianism, ethics of care, existential ethics) applies to a major contemporary moral issue (such as abortion, human experimentation, punishment, censorship, the use of violence). Evaluate the adequacy of the judgment that follows.