Question A. In chapter 2, Lynch discusses the relationship between emotion and reason. What are the Platonic and Humean pictures of that
relationship? Why does Lynch reject them? Which picture (Plato’s, Hume’s, Lynch’s, or other) do you find most plausible? Why?
Question B. As Lynch explains in chapter 2, some ‘alarming’ studies make some researchers skeptical of reason. Why is that? According to Lynch,
however, “studies of this sort don’t in fact undermine the importance of reason.” (14) Explain how Lynch uses the notion of intuition, as well as the QuineDuhem hypothesis to show that. Do you agree with Lynch that those studies are not alarming? Why?
Question C. In chapter 3, Lynch writes that: “fundamental epistemic principles cannot be defended by appeal to reasons appreciable from a common
point of view. Reason, as we might put it, can’t defend itself.” (56) What does that mean, and why does Lynch say that? In answering, make sure to
explain (only) one of the following two problems: Agrippa’s trilemma (aka the regress problem) or David Hume’s problem of induction. Do you agree that
reason ‘cannot defend itself’ (that it can only be given a circular defense and/or that a circular defense cannot justify anything)? Why?

Sample Solution