I will award two prizes in our class.
1. The best Poster Board
2. The best argument presented on the Poster Board.
Friday, April 23, 2010
IOCC 201 Information
- Our review session will be on Thursday, April 29th from 2-3pm in Ed 104/105.
- Your last paper is due the last day of class: Tuesday April 27th.
- Our final is on Friday April 30th from 12-2 in Ed 104/105.
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
2 for 1 due on Friday
Exam II
Modern Philosophy
Spring 2010
This exam is a take-home exam. It is due in a printed form on the 31st of March no later than 12:10pm. If I am not in my office place the exam in the folder hanging on the wall by my door marked for this course. I use some fancy words in this exam, look them up.
Please select two of the following three questions and write a thoughtful, complete, well argued essay in response. I would think that it would take a minimum of 1,000 words for each. These are NOT research questions so stick to the text and your notes on our discussion. Do not collaborate on this exam, do your own work. If you use a secondary source full citations are necessary. Each question is worth 50 points.
1. Select an object that you can see right now. Completely describe your perception of that object using Berkeley. At a minimum, make sure and consider the following: Idea, sensation, the status of the object when you are looking at it, the status of the object when you are not in the room, the existence of the object, and God.
2. What is the status of God according to the following thinkers: Leibniz, Berkeley and Hume. (Be sure and give a complete account) Of the three, which do you think is correct, or closest to the truth? Why? Why do the other two come up short?
3. According to Hobbes what is the status of man (humans)? Why do we have families? What is the “state of nature”? Did it really exist? Why use the hypothesis of “state of nature”? Describe the legal status of war according to Hobbes. Describe an ideal state according to Hobbes. How close is the United States?
Modern Philosophy
Spring 2010
This exam is a take-home exam. It is due in a printed form on the 31st of March no later than 12:10pm. If I am not in my office place the exam in the folder hanging on the wall by my door marked for this course. I use some fancy words in this exam, look them up.
Please select two of the following three questions and write a thoughtful, complete, well argued essay in response. I would think that it would take a minimum of 1,000 words for each. These are NOT research questions so stick to the text and your notes on our discussion. Do not collaborate on this exam, do your own work. If you use a secondary source full citations are necessary. Each question is worth 50 points.
1. Select an object that you can see right now. Completely describe your perception of that object using Berkeley. At a minimum, make sure and consider the following: Idea, sensation, the status of the object when you are looking at it, the status of the object when you are not in the room, the existence of the object, and God.
2. What is the status of God according to the following thinkers: Leibniz, Berkeley and Hume. (Be sure and give a complete account) Of the three, which do you think is correct, or closest to the truth? Why? Why do the other two come up short?
3. According to Hobbes what is the status of man (humans)? Why do we have families? What is the “state of nature”? Did it really exist? Why use the hypothesis of “state of nature”? Describe the legal status of war according to Hobbes. Describe an ideal state according to Hobbes. How close is the United States?
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
Posters!
Modern Philosophy
Presentation Schedule
5 minutes each with your poster board.
Please see your syllabus and pass-out regarding the presentation and poster boards.
The best poster boards will hang with distinction by my office.
April 23
1. Rachel Riggle
2. Sam Capleton
3. Ashley Darting
4. Ann Leseberg
5. Kimberly Wheatley
6. Austin Haedicke
April 28
1. Allison Meffert
2. Alex Sonka
3. Brett Aguirre
4. Webster Boose
5. Nick Kennedy
6. Craig McMurtry
Presentation Schedule
5 minutes each with your poster board.
Please see your syllabus and pass-out regarding the presentation and poster boards.
The best poster boards will hang with distinction by my office.
April 23
1. Rachel Riggle
2. Sam Capleton
3. Ashley Darting
4. Ann Leseberg
5. Kimberly Wheatley
6. Austin Haedicke
April 28
1. Allison Meffert
2. Alex Sonka
3. Brett Aguirre
4. Webster Boose
5. Nick Kennedy
6. Craig McMurtry
Thursday, April 1, 2010
Answers to IOCC questions
Muhammad died of an illness.
The order of the 4 Gospels:
Clement of Alexandria on the "Order" of the Gospels
[¶1] Proponents of the Griesbach hypothesis have often appealed to a tradition handed down by Clement of Alexandria in support of their position that Mark used Matthew and Luke.1 Written early in his career in the now lost Hypotyposeis, Clement's information has been preserved for us by Eusebius of Caesarea as follows:
[¶2] But again in those very books Clement presented a tradition of the original elders (paradwsin twn anekaqen presbuterwn) about the "order" of the gospels (peri thV tacewV twn euaggeliwn) in this manner: He said that those of the gospels comprising the genealogies were "written before" (progegrafqai elegen twn euaggeliwn ta perieconta taV genealogiaV), but (de) that Mark had this "disposition" (tauthn eschkenai thn oikonomian): that when Peter was in Rome preaching the word openly (dhmosia) and proclaiming (exeipontoV) the gospel by the spirit, those present, who were many, entreated Mark, as one who followed him for a long time and remembered what was said, to record what was spoken; but that after he composed the gospel, he shared it (metadounai) with those who wanted it; that, when Peter found out about it, he did not actively discourage or encourage it; but that John, last, aware that the physical facts were disclosed (sunidonta oti ta swmatika en toiV euaggelioiV dedhlwtai) in the gospels, urged by friends, and inspired by the spirit, composed a spiritual gospel. So much for Clement. (Eus., Hist. eccl. 6.14.5-7)2
[¶3] Although leading source critics have disputed the value of this information,3 Clement's statement, progegrafqai elegen twn euaggeliwn ta perieconta taV genealogiaV, is widely understood to mean that Matthew and Luke, which include genealogies, were written first, i.e., before Mark and John.4 Under this interpretation, Clement's statement raises perplexing questions that have not been satisfactorily resolved.5
The order of the 4 Gospels:
Clement of Alexandria on the "Order" of the Gospels
[¶1] Proponents of the Griesbach hypothesis have often appealed to a tradition handed down by Clement of Alexandria in support of their position that Mark used Matthew and Luke.1 Written early in his career in the now lost Hypotyposeis, Clement's information has been preserved for us by Eusebius of Caesarea as follows:
[¶2] But again in those very books Clement presented a tradition of the original elders (paradwsin twn anekaqen presbuterwn) about the "order" of the gospels (peri thV tacewV twn euaggeliwn) in this manner: He said that those of the gospels comprising the genealogies were "written before" (progegrafqai elegen twn euaggeliwn ta perieconta taV genealogiaV), but (de) that Mark had this "disposition" (tauthn eschkenai thn oikonomian): that when Peter was in Rome preaching the word openly (dhmosia) and proclaiming (exeipontoV) the gospel by the spirit, those present, who were many, entreated Mark, as one who followed him for a long time and remembered what was said, to record what was spoken; but that after he composed the gospel, he shared it (metadounai) with those who wanted it; that, when Peter found out about it, he did not actively discourage or encourage it; but that John, last, aware that the physical facts were disclosed (sunidonta oti ta swmatika en toiV euaggelioiV dedhlwtai) in the gospels, urged by friends, and inspired by the spirit, composed a spiritual gospel. So much for Clement. (Eus., Hist. eccl. 6.14.5-7)2
[¶3] Although leading source critics have disputed the value of this information,3 Clement's statement, progegrafqai elegen twn euaggeliwn ta perieconta taV genealogiaV, is widely understood to mean that Matthew and Luke, which include genealogies, were written first, i.e., before Mark and John.4 Under this interpretation, Clement's statement raises perplexing questions that have not been satisfactorily resolved.5
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)