Philosophy CSS Paper I 2002

FEDERAL PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
COMPETITIVE EXAMINATION FOR RECRUITMENT TO POSTS
IN BPS – 17 UNDER THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, 2002.

PHILOSOPHY, PAPER – I

TIME ALLOWED: THREE HOURS MAXIMUM MARKS:100

NOTE: Attempt any five questions including Question No. 8 which is compulsory. All questions carry equal marks.

1. What is Logic? Evaluate in brief Aristotelian Logic.

2. How Induction differs from Deduction? Can Induction be justified?

3. What is the purpose and function of Definition? Discuss various forms of Definition.

4. What is Symbolic Logic? Is it an improvement over traditional logic?

5. Discuss the traditional Square of Opposition.

6. Discuss Ibn-e-Taymiyyah’s refutation of Aristotelian Metaphysics and Logic.

7. Write short notes on any Three of the following:
   (a) Categorical Syllogism
   (b) Dilemma
   (c) Laws of Thought
   (d) Probability
   (e) Argument by Analogy
   (f) Functional Analysis
   COMPULSORY QUESTION

8. Write only the correct answer in the Answer Book. Do not reproduce the questions.

(A) Distinguish between the Deductive and Inductive arguments:
(1) Since the test proved that it took at least 2.3 seconds to operate the bullet on Omer’s rifle. Omer obviously could not have fired three times hitting Ahmad twice and Ali once on 5.6 second or less.
(2) A gardener who cultivates his own garden with his own hands unites in his own person three different characters of land-lord, farmer and labourer. His produce, therefore, should pay him the rent of the first, profit of the second and the wages of the thirds.
(3) It is evident from the state of the country from the habits of the people, from the experience we have had on the point itself, that it is impracticable to raise any very considerable sums by direct taxation. Tax laws have in vain been multiplied, new methods to enforce the collection have in vain been tried, the public expectations disappointed and the treasuries of the states have remained empty.
(4) (I don’t have this one. This is missing)
(5) There is, of course, no filament or heating element in the transistor to burn it out. Consequently, transistor should lost almost indefinitely, subject only to limitations of abuse, deterioration through diffusion of water vapour through the casing and so on.

(B) If “Some Saints were martyrs” is true
AND
“Some merchants are not pirates” is true what may be inferred about the truth of falsehood of the following propositions?
(6) Some martyrs were not saints
(7)All martyrs were not saints
(8) No martyr were saints
(9) Some non-pirates are non-merchants
(10) All non-pirates are non-merchants

(C) Discuss the validity of invalidity of the following arguments.
(11) Smith is a fine man or Smith is the engineer. Smith is not a fine man. Therefore Smith is the engineer.
(12) If the second native told truth, then the first native denied being a politician. Therefore if the second native told the truth, then the third native told the truth.
(13) Mr. Smith is the brakeman’s next-door neighbor or Mr. Robinson is the brakeman’s next-door neighbor. Therefore Mr. Smith is the brakeman’s next-door neighbor.
(14) There is no case known in which the thing is found to be efficient cause of itself, for if it were so, it would be prior to itself, which is impossible..
(15) It is clear that we mean something and something is different in each case, by such words (as cause change, etc.). If we did not we could not use them consistently, and it is obvious that on the whole we do consistently apply and with hold such names.

(D) If the following argument by analogy has five additional premises suggested for it; for each of these alternative premises, decide whether its addition would make the resulting argument more or less probable.
An investor has purchased one hundred shares of oil stock every December for the past five years. In every case the value of the stock has appreciated about 3 percent a year, and it has paid regular dividends of about 5 percent a year on the price he bought it. This December he decides to buy another hundred shares of Oil Stock, reasoning that he will probably receive modest earnings while watching the value of his new purchase increase over the years.
(16) Suppose he had purchased oil stock every December for the past fifteen years instead of only five years.
(17) Suppose the oil-stock previously purchased had gone up by 10 percent a year instead of only 3 percent a year.
(18) Suppose his previous purchase of Oil-stock had been in foreign companies as well as in Eastern, Southern and Western American Oil Companies.
(19) Suppose he learns that the Federal Government is considering the passage of a new law to regulate oil and gas companies more strictly.
(20) Suppose he discovers that Tobacco Stocks have just raised their dividend payments.