Information about your Final Exam

Date:

It can take a while for the university to set the date for the final exam, so be sure to arrange to be in
town for the entire exam period (August 2-11) at least until the definite exam dates are set. In a
class of this size I cannot make special arrangements for you just because the date that the
University has chosen for the exam isn’t convenient for you.

Format:

For the final exam, you will be expected to write 10 short essays, choosing 10 questions from a list
of 12 provided at the start of the exam. These twelve questions will themselves be taken from a list
to be found on the following three pages. Your answers should be about 300 words each, and each
essay will be worth 10% of your exam grade. (Please note that if you answer all 12 questions, you
will simply be graded on the first ten questions that you answer, not on the best ten.)

Since the exam is not open book, you will not be expected to include quotations or page references
with your essays. Further, you will not need introductory or concluding paragraphs. Still, you
should have grammatical sentences logically put together into coherent paragraphs. Point form
answers are not acceptable.

Since you have these questions in advance, you should be able to answer any of them clearly and
concisely. It is crucial for these essays to be on topic, you are more likely to hurt your grade by
including material that doesn’t directly relate to the assigned question than you by having an answer
that is a little on the short side.

Please Note: Because of problems we have had with past exams:

(1) Students are not allowed to use iPods, or any other sort of music player, during the exam.

(2) All cellular phones need to be put away at all times (so if you typically use your phone to tell
the time, be sure to bring an alternate timepiece for the exam itself).
 Final Exam: Essay Questions

Twelve of the following questions will appear on your final exam, and you will be expected to
answer ten of them. Your answers should be about 300 words each.

1. Explain what reasons Socrates gives in the Crito for not fleeing Athens, even though staying
means certain death. Explain why you do, or don’t, find these arguments sound.

2. In the Apology Plato claims that "no evil can happen to a good man”, but in the Crito he suggests
that “life is not worth living with a corrupted body”. Explain why one might think that these two
views are in tension with each other when you consider, for instance, a good person whose body
is corrupted through no fault of their own (say, they are paralyzed by someone who wants to make
an example of them). Do you think that there is a way for Plato to resolve this tension? If so,
suggest how he could do it. If not, explain why not.

3. Plato claims that "no evil can happen to a good man, either in life or after death", while Aristotle
argued that external events could seriously damage the quality of a person's life. Leaving aside
the question of whether the good person can be harmed after death, present these competing
positions about what harm can be done to the good person during their life, and explain why you
find one or the other more persuasive.

4. How does Epictetus recommend that we view our friends and family, and why does he make
such a recommendation? Would you adopt this sort of attitude towards them if you could (and
this attitude would include not being lonely, not missing them, etc.), explain why, or why not.

5. What reasons do Epicurus and Socrates give for not fearing death? Explain why you do, or don't,
find their arguments sound.

6. What is Epicurus’s conception of the human good, and what problems does Nozick's discussion
of the "experience Machine" pose for it? Explain why you do, or don’t, find Nozick’s criticisms
persuasive.

7. Why does Epicurus think that a life that focuses on pleasure should still be a just (i.e. law
abiding) one? Explain why you do, or don't, find his argument sound.

8. Compare the views of Nagel and Epicurus on the question of whether Death is a bad thing.
Whose views on the subject do you find the most persuasive and why?

9. Aristotle thinks that a human life is a 'happy' one to the extent that it fulfills the human function.
What does he take that function to be? Explain what arguments he gives for his position and
why you do, or don’t, find such arguments sound.

10. Why does Aristotle claim that children and animals are incapable of happiness, and what
difference does this show between what he calls "happiness" and what we do? Which
conception of happiness do you find superior and why?
11. What are Hume’s views on the moral status of suicide? Explain why you do, or don’t, find his
arguments on this topic to be sound.

12. Explain the similarities and differences between Schopenhauer’s and Hume’s views on suicide.
Whose views do you ultimately find more persuasive and why?

13. Briefly outline the "argument from Evil" as it was found in Schopenhauer's work, discuss how it
differs from similar arguments by Epicurus. Explain why you do, or don't, find the argument
from evil to be sound.

14. What does Schopenhauer recommend as the best life for us? Explain why you do, or don't, find
his views compatible with Marx's. Whose views are ultimately the most persuasive and why?

15. Epicurus argues that, if one follows his four maxims, one can live a life comparatively free of
suffering. By contrast, Schopenhauer argues that living a life free of suffering is almost
impossible. Outline the reasons they give for their positions, and state which argument you
find the most persuasive and why.

16. Why does Marx consider most workers "alienated" from their acts of production? Explain why
you do, or don't, think that his analysis applies to the work one does as a student. Does it make
a difference if (1) your major is something you are intrinsically interested in, or (2) it is
something that you are studying only because you expect the degree to help you get a job at the
end?

17. Both Marx and Aristotle understood the human good as involving a type of activity that was
particular to humans. Outline the similarities and differences between their two views and
explain which of the two conceptions of the human good you find more plausible and why.
18. What is the significance of the idea of ‘Eternal recurrence’ in Nietzsche’s thought? Explain
how he thinks that it’s possibility motivates his own type of morality and undermines traditional
‘Christian’ virtues. Explain why you do, or don’t, find Nietzsche’s arguments in this area
persuasive.

19. Consider the following passage from Nietzsche:

Wherever we encounter a morality, we find an evaluation and ranking of human drives and actions. These
evaluations and rankings are always the expression of the needs of a community and herd: that which benefits it the
most – and second most, and third most – is also the highest standard of value for all individuals. With morality the
individual is instructed to be a function of the herd and to ascribe value to himself only as a function. Since the
conditions for preserving one community have been very different from those of another community, there have
been very different moralities. (The Gay Science, #116)

Which other philosopher that we have studied this semester does the view expressed here seem
most similar too? Explain why you think that the two views are similar, and whether or not you
find the shared view to be sound.

20. Consider the following passage from Nietzsche:

 Seeking work for the sake of wages – in this, nearly all people in civilized countries are alike; to all of them, work is
just a means and not itself the end, which is why they are unrefined in their choice of work, provided it yields an ample
reward. Now there are rare individuals who would rather perish than work without taking pleasure in their work: they
are choosy, hard to please, and have no use for ample rewards if the work is not itself the reward of rewards. To this
rare breed belong artists and contemplative men of all kinds, but also men of leisure who spend their lives hunting,
travelling, in love affairs, or on adventures. All of them want work and misery as long as it is joined with pleasure,
and the heaviest, hardest work, if need be. Otherwise they are resolutely idle, even if it spells impoverishment,
dishonor, and danger to life and limb. (The Gay Science, #42)

Explain what you think that Marx would, and wouldn't approve of in this paragraph. Whose
views on Work do you find more plausible, Marx's or Nietzsche's? Explain why.

21. How do Sartre's views relate to Nietzsche's writings on the theme of "God is dead"? Do you
find Sartre's resulting views persuasive? If so, explain why, if not, explain why not.

22. What does Sartre mean when he says that, in our case, "existence precedes essence", and what
do the consequences he draw from this fact (forlornness, anguish, despair) entail for how we
should think about our lives? Explain why you do, or don't, find his views plausible.

23. What are the two senses of “Humanism” that Sartre contrasts, and which of the two does he
endorse? Explain why you do, or don’t, find Sartre’s version of Humanism to be plausible.

24. Give a brief account of the egoistic hedonism that Epicurus thinks that we should use to govern
our lives and explain what, if any, criticisms Sartre would have of Epicurus's view. Explain
why you think one or the other has a more accurate conception of the point of human life.

25. Explain why Tolstoy sunk into a depression in spite of the outward success he seemed to be
having with every aspect of his life. Explain why you do, or don't, find his reaction justified.

26. What is the difference, for James, between the 'healthy minded' temperament, and the 'sick
soul', and what are the differences between what is required to make each type of person happy?
Explain which of the two world-views you find more compelling and why.

27. Why does James think that we are justified in believing that the natural world is only part of a
larger reality, and how does this help us take life to be worth living? Explain why you do, or
don’t, find his arguments in this area sound.

28. What does Nagel think makes something 'absurd', and why does he think that our lives often are
absurd in this way? Do you think that his arguments for this are sound? Explain why, or why
not.

29. Explain what, for Wolf, makes for a meaningful life, and how she contrasts it with the three
types of life that she thinks fail to be meaningful. Explain why you do, or don’t, take her
arguments against the meaningfulness of these other three types of life to be sound.

30. How does Wolf answer claims, like Nagel’s, that our lives are necessarily ‘absurd’, and how do
you think that Nagel would respond to her position. Explain which of the two positions you
find more compelling and why.