1 Either (a) What is the role of Boethius’s understanding of eternity in
his argument that God knows future contingent events?
Or (b) How does Boethius uphold the claim that someone who
judges something to be otherwise than it is may none the less know it?
How does he use this claim?
2 Either (a) What, in Ockham’s view, is Scotus’s argument to show how
humans can will contingently? Are Ockham’s arguments against this view
conclusive?
Or (b) ‘Ockham succeeds in solving the problem of divine
prescience simply through an analysis of the logic of statements about the
future.’ Discuss.
3 Either (a) How new was the scepticism of Descartes’s First Meditation
in its arguments and aims?
Or (b) Analyse the proof of God’s existence in Descartes’s Third
Meditation. Why did Descartes, at this point in his argument, choose to
use this type of proof?
4 ‘The soul, which is the true substantial form of human being …’
(DESCARTES) Discuss.
5 ‘Locke’s theory of perception leads inevitably to scepticism.’ Discuss.
6 What does Locke mean by the idea of ‘substance in general’ and is it
coherent?
7 Compare Descartes’s conception of the self with Locke’s.
8 Why does Leibniz think that we should believe in monads? How plausible
is his case?
9 Either (a) ‘Leibniz’s account of truth leaves him unable to distinguish
the necessary from the contingent.’ Discuss.
Or (b) What connection, if any, is there between Leibniz’s logic
and his metaphysics?
10 Critically assess Berkeley’s views on either abstract ideas or secondary
qualities.
– 3 – PHT1/5
11 To what degree can Berkeley provide an adequate account of other
minds?
12 Is Hume an anti-realist concerning causation? Should he be?
13 ‘Hume is a projectivist about the self and his position is therefore
incoherent.’ Discuss.
14 Was Hume a cognitive scientist? Why, if at all, would the answer matter?
15 To what extent is the distinction between rationalism and empiricism a
stable one? Discuss with reference to any two authors on the syllabus.