Philosophy 100 Introduction to Philosophy Fall 2006 Study Guide for Third Exam (rev 12/11) 1. State the Likelihood Principle. Give an example in which the Likelihood Principle gives the right result. That is, (a) describe some evidence and two hypotheses; (b) say which hypothesis the evidence best supports; (c) explain why the Likelihood principle also says that the evidence best supports that hypothesis. 2. Present and Explain the Argument from Design (Design vs. Chance version), as applied to the vetebrate eye. 3. Present the Argument from Design (Design vs. Evolution version), as applied to the vertebrate eye. Provide a rationale for the first premise. Provide a reason to think that the second premise is false. 4. Define "Chance process." Give an example of a chance process. Explain why evolution is not a chance process. 5. Define "Chance process." Give an example of a chance process. In class we discussed the suggestion that each particular arrangement of matter, including an arrangement in which the vertebrate eye has the features we observe it to have, is very likely on the chance hypothesis. Explain this suggestion in more detail. Do you think it is right? Why or why not? 6. Present the Argument from Evil. Give a rationale for the first premise. 7. We discussed several challenges to the rationale for the first premise. Choose two of them (other than versions of the free will defense). Do the following for each of the two challenges you've chosen: (a) state that challenge. (b) answer the following question: does that challenge succeed in providing a reason God could have to permit so much pain and suffering? Why or why not? 8. PEE the argument that acting freely is not itself a good thing, based on the scenario of Chris the Criminal. 9. State the free will defense (second version). State one question we discussed about the free will defense (second version). How might a theist answer this question? Do you think this is a good answer? Why or why not? 10. [question on the grandfather paradox canceled.] 11. PEE the first argument that time travel into the past is impossible.