UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS
DEPARTMENT OF PHILOSOPHY

PHILOSOPHY 321: HISTORY OF MODERN PHILOSOPHY

Vere Chappell                                                                                                                                                                                    Spring 2003

All students are required to write papers on the four topics printed in bold type (nos. 02, 05, 09, and 13).   Junior year writers (and only junior 
year writers) are also required to write papers on the four topics printed in italics (nos. 01, 04, 08, and 12).  No papers are to be written on the 
remaining five topics, printed in plain type; students may use these to guide their reading for the week in question.

Papers should be printed, double-spaced, and stapled, and should contain 500-600 words (approximately two pages).  They must be handed in 
at the beginning of class on the date indicated.  Late papers will not be accepted, and no make-ups will be allowed.

Please do not submit papers by e-mail.


01. Feb 04       Descartes, in order to construct a system of knowledge, must have indubitable principles to start from.  He identifies
                      several such principles in the Second Meditation.  (1) State the first such principle that he reaches, and explain his justifi-
                      cation for it.  (2) State one additional such principle that he arrives at, and outline his justification for that.

02. Feb 11       Descartes claims that he cannot be certain that clearly and distinctly perceived propositions are true unless he is
                     certain that God exists.  But he also acknowledges that he cannot be certain that God exists unless he is certain that 
                     several clearly and distinctly perceived propositions - such as the causal principle - are true.  Is he arguing in a circle here?  
                     If so, how so; if not, why not?  In any case, what is wrong, if anything is, with arguing in a circle?

03. Feb 18       State Descartes's principal argument for the distinctness of the human mind from the human body.  Is the argument,
                      as you have stated it, valid? Is it sound? Defend whatever position you take.


04. Feb 27        Explain Leibniz's theory of truth, and the distinction he draws between truths that are necessary and those that are 
                       contingent.  Be sure to answer (among others) the following questions:  What does the truth of a true proposition consist 
                       in?  What is the principle on which all necessary truths depend?  What is the principle on which all contingent truths 
                       depend?  How are truths of these two kinds discovered and proved?  Give, in addition, two or three examples of necessary 
                       and of contingent truths, and state two or three of the main consequences that Leibniz infers from his theory of truth.

05. Mar 06       Leibniz on individual substance:  
                       (1) What is an individual substance for Leibniz?  What has to be true of x in order for x to be an individual substance?
                       (2) List and explain two of the most important metaphysical truths about individual substances that Leibniz puts forward.
                       (3) How does Leibniz differentiate between bodies (corporeal or material substances) and minds (intelligent immaterial substances)?
                       (4) What relations does Leibniz think hold between the body and the mind of an individual human being? 

06. Mar 11         Why is human freedom a problem for Leibniz?  That is, what features of his metaphysical system threaten to render freedom impossible?
                       What is it about freedom that makes it seem vulnerable to Leibniz's other doctrines?  How does Leibniz attempt to resolve this problem?  Do
                       you think his efforts succeed?  Why or why not?  


07. Mar 25       No topic.

08. Apr 01          (a) What is an idea for Locke? Give an example of one. (b) What is a quality? Give an example. (c) How do ideas and 
                        qualities differ from one another? (d) In what way or ways are they alike? (e) What is a primary quality? Give an 
                        example of one. (f) What is a secondary quality? Give an example. (g) How do these two kinds of qualites differ from 
                        one another? (h) In what way or ways are they alike? Be sure to answer all of these questions.  (Primary text: Essay 
                        II.viii; also see I.i and II.i.)

09. Apr 08         (a) What is a person for Locke? (b) If x is a person existing at time t, and y is a person existing at a later time t1, what 
                        has to be true in order for x and y to be the same person? (c) Let b be you at the moment of your birth and let n be you 
                        now. Are b and n the same person according to Locke's account of personal identity? Why or why not?

10. Apr 15          (a) What is a nominal essence for Locke? Give an example of one. (b) What is a real essence? Give an example. 
                        (c) How do these two essences differ from one another? (d) In what way or ways are they alike?


11. Apr 22          Hume claims that all the 'perceptions of the human mind' divide exclusively into 'impressions' and 'ideas'.  What are impressions and 
                        ideas, and how does Hume distinguish them (give examples)?  Having distinguished impressions and ideas, Hume makes the further
                        claim that 'all our ideas ... are copies of our impressions ...'.  What does he mean by this latter claim; how does he profess to prove it; 
                        and what use does he make (or propose to make) of it?

12. Apr 29           In Enquiry Sect. 4, Hume raises 'sceptical doubts' about the understanding.  What exactly do these doubts amount to in the case 
                         of 'reasonings concerning matters of fact'?  Be sure to (1) explain what Hume takes such reasonings to be (give an example, for one 
                         thing), and (2) outline the argument or arguments by which he seeks to justify these doubts.  (Note: what Hume calls reasonings 
                         concerning matters of fact, philosophers today call inductive reasonings or inductive inferences.) 

13. May 06         Hume would have said that Adam's action of eating the apple in the Garden of Eden is both necessary and free,  in the proper sense of 
                         each of these words.  What are these senses (i.e. what does it mean to say that the action is necessary and that it is free in these senses, 
                         respectively)?  Hume also says that there is another, improper sense of 'necessary' and 'free', used by some philosophers, in which Adam's 
                         action is not necessary and is not free, and in which, indeed, it would be a contradiction to say of any action that it is both necessary and 
                         free in these senses.  What are these senses?  Do you agree with Hume that nothing could, without contradiction, be said to be both necessary 
                         and free in these senses?

14. May 13          List the different kinds of skepticism that Hume discusses in Enquiry Sect. 12, with a brief characterization of each.  Explain both how each 
                         kind of skepticism differs from the others and what all of them have in common.  Also describe Hume's judgment of the value of each kind of
                         skepticism.