Download Sample Questions for Midterm Exam - Topics in the Philosophy of Religion | REL 4461 and more Exams World Religions in PDF only on Docsity! MIDTERM EXAM REL 4461 KANT SEMINAR Answer three (3) questions in essay form; minimum of two (2) pages per question. 1. Explain the difference between Kant’s “transcendental idealism” and Descartes’ “transcendent realism” or “empirical idealism” (e.g. §49, pages 88, 89, and also pages 40-45 indirectly). You have studied both carefully and explain the differences based on the texts (Meditations and the Prolegomena) you have read. 2. In his “Refutation of Idealism” (Notes II and III, pages 40-45, and indirectly elsewhere as well) Kant distances himself from Berkeley’s “mystical” or “visionary idealism” (everything is an idea in the mind, including physical objects outside us). Yet, he was charged for being precisely a Berkelian idealist. Analyze this section and present Kant’s argument (here and other parts of the Prolegomena) as to why his idealism is different from Berkeley’s. Is not Kant in the end as much as a “subjective idealist” as Berkeley? 3. Kant’s nemesis is undboutedly David Hume. Throughout the Prolegomena Kant (e.g. page 10, 20, 29, §§ 27-30, pages 62-65 and other places) keeps stating that he has resolved Hume’s problem and answered his criticism concerning the theory of knowledge (parts I and II of the Prolegomena). Present’s Hume’s argument as reconstructed by Kant with the aid of the Hume selection from the Inquiry posted on the syllabus, and then state Kant’s reply to Hume. 4. Kant says that he is an “empirical realist” and also a “transcendental idealist.” Basing yourself on a close reading of the text, what does this distinction entail? Support your exposition with judicious use of the Prolegomena (and other texts invoked to illustrate Kant’s point of view). 5. Kant says that both Descartes and Hume treat objects as things in themselves and therefore their position ends up unavoidably in scepticism. Explain what Kant might have meant by this and why he says that transcendental idealism is the only way to avoid the sceptical consequences of Descartes’ and Hume’s views. Again, I am looking for textually-based answers, not speculation or opinions not tethered (i.e. supported) by the texts themselves.
