Download Each of the two essays should be approximately 800 words, which is

Each of the two essays should be approximately 800 words, which is about four single spaced/exam booklet
pages. Four of these topics will be on the test, and you can choose two of those four.
1.
Descartes bases his foundation of knowledge, that God exists and is not a deceiver, on the claim that
there are such things as innate ideas. Locke and Berkeley both begin their philosophical works with
denunciations of such theories, Locke specifically addressing innate ideas (Book 1, Chap. II) and Berkeley (his
Introduction, paras. 9-12, pp. 40-43) focusing on abstract general ideas. Choose to discuss either Locke or
Berkeley, against Descartes, in the context of rational vs empiricism.
2.
Still on the topic of God, proofs for God's existence are given by Locke (refer to bottom p. 26 of his
Essay, and Chap.XI, Book IV), Berkeley (paras. 28-33 in the PHK and first part of TDBH&P), and Leibniz
(Monadology, paras. 31-46). On the test, you will be asked to discuss two of these three.
3.
Both Locke and Leibniz have significant discussions on the issue of human freedom (Locke is against the
term "free will"), each stemming from their own particular epistemologies. Choose to discuss either Locke or
Leibniz, Locke as the empiricist and Leibniz the rationalist.
4.
On the test, four of these criticisms will be offered for you to discuss.
First, then, it will be objected that by the foregoing principles all that is real and substantial in nature is
banished out of the world, and instead thereof a chimerical scheme of ideas takes place. All things that exist,
exist only in the mind, that is, they are purely notional. What therefore becomes of the sun, moon and stars?
What must we think of houses, rivers, mountains, trees, stones; nay, even of our own bodies? Are all these
but so many chimeras and illusions on the fancy?
Secondly, it will be objected that there is a great difference betwixt real fire for instance, and
the idea of fire, betwixt dreaming or imagining oneself burnt, and actually being so:
Thirdly, it will be objected that we see things actually without or at distance from us, and which
consequently do not exist in the mind; it being absurd that those things which are seen at the
distance of several miles should be as near to us as our own thoughts.
Fourthly, it will be objected that from the foregoing principles it follows things are every
moment annihilated and created anew.
Sixthly, you will say there have been a great many things explained by matter and motion; take away these
and you destroy the whole corpuscular philosophy, and undermine those mechanical principles which have
been applied with so much success to account for the phenomena.
In the eighth place, the universal concurrent assent of mankind may be thought by some an invincible
argument in behalf of Matter, or the existence of external things. Must we suppose the whole world to be
mistaken?
5. . Write a mini essay on each of the following, i.e., a two-page essay on each, answering both:
1) Leibniz claims that there are individual substances, or monads, that are the structure of reality. Making
reference mainly to the Discourse on Metaphysics, discuss this claim as clearly as you can.
2) Making reference to God's role in creation, why and how is this is the best of all possible worlds?
6. How do Locke (Chap.XI, Book IV) and Berkeley (God proof in TDBH&P) prove the existence of external
objects? How do these contrast with Descartes' proof (p. 97, MOFP)?