PH 203 Early modern philosophy final exam Texts covered: 1. Maarten Utlee, The Republic of Letters 2.

Rene Descartes, 6 meditations 3. Correspondence with Princess Elisabeth 4. Cavendish, Philosophical Letters 5. Spinoza, Ethics pt 1 and 2 6. Leibniz, Monadology and Theodicy 7. Locke, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding 8. Berkeley, Three dialogues 9. Berkeley, Principles of human Knowledge 10. Lady Mary Shepherd, Essays on the perception of an external universe 11. Hume, An enquiry concerntriing human understanding 12. Kant, Critique of pure reason

Descartes Goals of meditations: To prove the existence of god, to prove distinction of mind and body, to create a foundational cornerstone for philosophy and science Rejects trusting the senses, reject anything that has even a trace of potential falsity I am a thinking thingdoubts, affirms, denies, wills, refuses, imagines, perceives, understands (meditation two) I think therefore I amcogito ergo sum. Ceasing to think=ceasing to be There are no definitive signs to distinguish waking life from unconsciousness=dream argument Cant be certain of conscious state Reason isnt dependent on the senses Evil genius argument=that god is deceiving us Objective reality= mode of thought. A unicorn possesses objective reality because its being is possessed only by ideas. Causal Principle: Formal reality of cause is greater than or equal to the formal reality of the effect Causal principle of ideas: Formal reality of the cause is greater than or equal to the objective reality of the effect Rule of truth: whatever I clearly and distinctly perceive to be contained in the idea of something is true of that thing Essence of body is extension Idea/concepts are enough to identify essential qualities Real distinction between mind and body, extended things vs thinking things, both exist.

Cartesian circleproof for god presupposes reliability of clear and distinct ideas Proofs for god: rule of truth, I clearly and distinctly perceive that necessary existence is contained in the idea of god, god exists. 2. I have an idea of a supremely perfect being (a being with all perfections), necessary existence is a perfect, god exists. No conceptual link between mind and body. Interaction is brute.

Elisabeth Argues that there may be unknown properties in the soul that allow it to interact with the body Spinoza-naturalist, determinist, necessitarianist Descartes real distinction argument relies on Spinozas concept of no shared attributes, which is that if one substance has the attribute of extension, no other substance can have that attribute and not be the same thing? Mode= the way an attribute manifests itself, eg thought manifests itself in doubting, denying, understanding, etc Is thought a mode of extension? No, because thought and extension are separate attributes mind may be a mode of thought thought is not a mode of extension because thought is an attribute of god; we can conceive of an infinite thinking thing the mind parallels the body Proof for substance monism: 1. Two substances having different attributes have nothing in common with each other 2. If two things have nothing in common with each other they cant be the cause of each other 3. Two or more distinct things are distinguished from one another 4. In nature, there cannot be two or more substances of the same nature or attribute 5. One substance cannot be produced by another substance 6. It pertains to the nature of a substance to exist 7. Every substance is necessarily infinite 8. Gods attributes= any complete way we can think about gods essence. Extension, thought, infinite. Everything is determined, there are no other possibilities All decisions trace back ad-infinitum to a prior cause

Leibniz Theodicy-defense of gods justice A naturalist Monad-simple substance, most fundamental element of nature Matter doesnt explain thinking, though thinking may explain our perception of matter An independenent being must have determined this series of events and not a different one for a reason Problem of evil-a benevolent god created sin and suffering? Antecedent will= prior will, the hopes of god, his desires Moral evil- comes from us, we will morally bad acts God permits not wills evil, it is a necessary consequence of him performing his duty Locke Identity is due to inferences drawn from experience Hot/cold hand in water=perceptual relativity Hume-relations of ideas versus matters of fact. Relation of idea=necessary, contrary is not possible, discoverable by thought alone. 3+3=6, matters of fact=contraries are completely possible, contingent. Eg the sun will rise tomorrow Unobserved matters of fact