作者kimozy (蛋塔)
看板NCCU_Exam
標題[試題] 971 林從一老師 哲學概論 期末考
時間Wed Jan 14 19:03:49 2009
課程名稱:哲學概論
課程性質:必修
開課教師:林從一老師
開課學院:文學院
開課系級:哲學一
考試日期(年月日):2009/01/14
考試時限(Mins):180 mins
試題本文:
Instruction: You must answer (1), (4), (5) and one of (2) and (3).
1. G.E. Moore argues that there can only be one answer to the question "What
is good?", that is: good is good, or, alternatively, 'good' is indefinalbe.
Describe an evaluate Moore's argument(s). Make sure in you answer to
include explanations of the concept of "naturalistic fallacy" and that of
"open question technique."
2. 請說明康德對於hypothetical imperative及categorical imperative的區分。你可
以參考以下的資料以進行說明,你也可以完全忽略它。
* For Kant, moral value is determined ultimately by the nature of the
intention of the agent, which in turn is determined by the nature of what
he (Kant) calls the general maxim or subjective principle underlying a
person's action. One follow a hypothetical imperative when one's maxim does
not presume an unconditional end, a goal (like the fulfillment of duty)
that one should have irrespective of all sensible desires, but rather a
"material end" dependent on contingent inclinations (e.g., the directive
"get this food," in order to feel happy). In contrast, a categorical
imperative is a directive saying that what ought to be done from the
perspective of pure reason alone; it is categorical commands is not
contingent on sensible circumstances and it always carries overriding value.
The general formula of the categorical imperative is to act only according
to those maxims that can be consistently willed as a universal law -
something said to be impossible for maxims aimed merely at material ends.
In accepting this imperative, we are doubly self-determined, for we are not
only determining our action freely, as Kant believes humans do in all
exercises of the faculty of choice; we are also accepting a principle whose
content is determined by that which is absolutely essential to us as
agents, namely our pure practical reason. We thus are following our own law
and so have autonomy when we accept the categorical imperative; otherwise
we fall into heteronomy, or the (free) acceptance of principles whose
content is determined independently of the essential nature of our own
ultimate being, which is rational.
3. 請說明康德並評價所主張的the principle of universalizability。說明它的內容、
它如何決定合道德的判斷。在你的評價中請包括它所面臨的困難。你可以參考上題所
提供的資料以進行說明,你也可以完全忽略它。
4. 請說明囚犯悖論如何支持政府存在的合理性。你贊成嗎?為什麼?
5. 請在Plato的Apology中界定出一個論證並評價它。
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 122.116.184.10
1F:→ RobNen:done 01/15 16:48
2F:推 myyatu:爛老師一定要噓 一學期都在上他會的心靈哲學,還有一點點 01/21 10:43
3F:→ myyatu:美國政治哲學,這門課可以改叫英美哲學課或心靈哲學,可是 01/21 10:44
4F:→ myyatu:又沒有那麼專業 而且老師根本沒備課 就算他會的也講的不清 01/21 10:45
5F:→ myyatu:不楚 哲一同學的基本概念大概全來自劉若韶而已 真是混蛋 01/21 10:46
6F:推 ShinI09:我大一修過林從一的哲概 大二修了他的語哲 個人認為林老師 06/15 01:25
7F:→ ShinI09:的授課方式沒什麼不好 甚至比一般台灣學生習慣的教學方式 06/15 01:26
8F:→ ShinI09:都來的有趣 更何況讀書本就是自己的事 "老師"的角色理應 06/15 01:28
9F:→ ShinI09:擔負啟發的責任 如此罷 偶爾我還會再翻閱當年密密麻麻 06/15 01:30
10F:→ ShinI09:的筆記 有很多不是老師寫在黑板上逼著同學抄的 06/15 01:30
11F:→ ShinI09:而是在問題碰撞之間的想法與火花 06/15 01:31