Hi Students, 

I’m writing this to prepare you for Quiz 1.

Here are the examinable content:

(1) Week 2 and 3’s lecture slides
(2) Nozick’s “The Experience Machine”

You have ONE ATTEMPT and it’s TIMED. Note that Singer’s reading, contrary to what I’ve mentioned during tutorial 1 is NOT REQUIRED.

It’s recommended that you take the Quiz after tutorials because we will clarify some potential misunderstandings you may have during tutorials.

On the final exams, iPads are not supported. You need an actual laptop. Let me know in advance if you need to borrow one from the University. There are laptops for loan.

Results for Quiz 1 will be released on 18 Sept (Mon) 00:01.

Let’s get on to the actual tips on how to prepare:

1. On key examinable concepts (e.g., what’s morally right/wrong, what does classical utilitarianism say), please TEST your own understanding of these concepts by asking: (1) what does it NOT say? (2) what can it be CONFUSED with? Ask yourself, what DOES IT MEAN, for someone to be a hedonist, for instance—what are the “core ingredients” necessary and sufficient for one to be a hedonist, for instance? Do this testing for every key concept you encounter in the slides. Concepts like these are usually defined carefully in your slides and you should be able to identify them easily. If you have difficulties, let me know.

2. Read up on what is a valid argument in philosophy. Also master the necessary and sufficient conditions on your own. These two tools will aid you much in preparing for the quiz. I trust in all your abilities to do well for Quiz 1 so… do stay motivated and hungry!

Here is a sample question I’ve created (it’s not meant to approximate the actual test question) to give you a taste of how thoroughly your understanding will be tested in a philosophy quiz (spoiler alert: philosophy quizzes are HARD…).

After tutorial 1, Abe and Gene are thoroughly convinced by YT that Nasi Lemak is a must-try… They visited Crave to get their respective Nasi Lemak Royales. As they ate, they recall the explosion of flavours and depth of the dish… They were amazed. They decided to enjoy that Nasi Lemak while watching a Japanese samurai film (maybe Rashomon?). In it, a priest rushed in front of a samurai who was about to killed in a heated sword fight. The priest was instantly decapitated. Abe and Gene paused the film and pondered:

“If the paradox of self-sacrifice were a legitimate objection to the desire satisfaction theory, then this scene in the film would not have existed. In other words, it would have been impossible to depict this scene in the movie.”

Is the above statement True or False? Feel free to partake in the fun of this question by commenting in the comment section. Have a lovely weekend!

Best wishes,
YT.