PHI 2010, Quiz 4 (25 points). This quiz makes a total of 85 out of 190 total quiz points.

Answer one of the following three questions. Write legibly because illegible answers will receive no credit. Make sure your name is clearly legible, too.

1. How does Descartes use the causal adequacy principle in the Cosmological Argument for God’s existence?

The causal adequacy principle is the one such that the less perfect cannot create the more perfect, or alternately, that the cause of X must have at least as much reality as X itself. When Descartes talks about the Cosmological Argument, he points out that there must be a cause of his idea of God. And since the idea of God has more reality than the “real” (extramentally existent, formally real) Descartes, he can’t be the cause of the idea of God. The only thing capable of being the cause of the idea of God is something that possesses at least as much reality as the idea of God possesses. The only thing fitting that description is an actual being, God, who is infinite and perfect as the idea.

2. What is the distinction between primary and secondary qualities? What does it have to do with the existence of matter? You can answer either from Locke’s or Berkeley’s point of view.

For the materialist (or dualist), the existence of matter is in part verified by the distinction between primary and secondary qualities. The materialist or dualist holds the position that qualities are either perceiver dependent or they are the real, essential qualities of an object. The qualities that remain even in the absence of a perceiver (that is, the most real qualities, the ones that define an object), are independent of perceivers. So they must really exist in matter.

For the immaterialist, there is no distinction between primary and secondary qualities because, according to the materialist, they are all perceiver-dependent. For example, there is no idea of motion without the notion of a thing moving, of a color distinguishing the thing from its background, for example. And motion, to use that example again, is dependent upon a perceiver, and so cannot be a “primary” or “real” quality of material objects. In fact, the immaterialist claims, as you know, that there is no argument sufficient to prove the existence of matter, and not holding that matter exists produces more consistent scientific claims.

3. How does Descartes attempt to solve the problem of error?

Descartes’ supposed solution to the problem of error hinges on his claim that we are possessed of infinite free will but a finite capacity for understanding. What this means, in essence, is that we have the capacity to decide whether we will act on what we know or think we know. If we decide to act on or make judgments about things we do not fully understand, that is not the fault of God, who gives us free will so that we may act rightly. So the problem of error is “solved” by the notion that the errors we make are our own responsibility, not that of God – since God gives us the capacity to know clearly and distinctly at least some things, and the capacity to use our free will as we see fit. If we choose to act on or judge about something we do not fully understand, that is our fault.