Syllabus for Philosophy 101: Introduction to Philosophy, Spring 2007
Instructor: John Longeway Office: Greenquist 201
Time: 10:00–10:50 MWF Room: Mol D 101 Office Hours: MWF 11:00-12:00, 3-4; Tuesday by appointment.
Final Exam: May 9, 10:30 AM Office Phone: 595-2062 Email: longeway@uwp.edu
Philosophy Department Website: www.uwp.edu/academic/philosophy
This is a General Education course that satisfies a Breadth-of-knowledge (BOK) requirement in Humanities and the Arts. The course addresses the following General Education competencies:
1) Communication—Literacy: Reading and writing for understanding and effective communication. Learning Goals: At the end of this course students should be able to state philosophical arguments and views clearly, in writing that is grammatically correct and stylistically appropriate.
2) Reasoned Judgment—Critical Thinking—Applying logic and reasoning to problem solving. Learning Goals: At the end of this course students should be able to form a clear grasp of a philosophical thesis, and the arguments for and against it, and to assess the quality of the arguments.
3) Social and Personal Responsibility—Social Equality: Understanding and questioning the social, political, economic, and historical conditions that construct diversity and inequality. Learning Goals: At the end of the course students should be able to display an understanding of the variety of defensible philosophical views, and engage in fair and reasoned discourse about them.
Class Routine: In general, I will lecture, and expect to be interrupted when there are questions or objections. Sometimes I will question a class, especially to introduce a topic or problem, and sometimes to start a class discussion, and then I may well call on a few individuals if things are too quiet—just say you have nothing to contribute if you don’t want to talk.
Books: All readings not passed out as handouts will be from Steven Cahn, Philosophy for the 21st Century. Readings assigned for a given day should be done before that day.
Websites: There is a departmental website at www.uwp.edu/academic/philosophy, where information on philosophy in general can be found, including help with research (including philosophy-related websites and library research), logic and reasoning, writing, etc. From the departmental website one can access Prof. Longeway’s website, on which one of your readings will be found under ‘Philosophy of Relision.’
Exams and Papers: There will be five essays. Each essay will be typed, double-spaced, one inch margins, 4-5 pages in length. In the essays, you should expect to have to lay out and discuss positions and arguments discussed in class and the readings, but no reading outside the book will be required. If you draw more than three consecutive words from a source, they must be put into quotation marks or indented, and footnoted. If you do not mark your quotations as such, that is plagiarism. If you have someone else do your work, that is also plagiarism. If you plagiarize, I will give you an F on the paper, and no rewrites will be permitted. If the plagiarism is very extensive, or you do it twice, that’s an F in the course. This past Spring I gave 3 F’s for plagiarism in this class. If you don’t have it ready in time for class, you can hand it in at my office later in the day. Do not skip class because you don’t have your essay ready. If you can’t make it in to school at all, you can email your essay to me as an attachment, but you must hand in the hard copy the next time I see you. (I will only count it as handed in if I actually receive the email with a working attachment, so don’t mess it up.) Each essay will count 12% of your grade (60% in all). In addition there will be a final exam and a mid term exam, each of which will count 20% of your grade. These exams will not be objective, but rather will require brief essays, and short answers.
Attendance: It is rude to come to class late or leave early. Private conversations in class are also rude. While in class, turn off your cell phone and beeper or put them on ‘vibrate.’ If you must be available by beeper (it is required for your work, or in case of emergencies at home), then leave class quietly when you need to answer a call. (If you know you may be paged, sit near the door, where your leaving will create minimal confusion.) Attendance will be taken in each class, using a sign-up sheet. If you come late or leave early, that is half an absence. Your first three absences are free, and after that your final grade in the course will be reduced one notch (for instance, B+ to B) for each class missed without a very good excuse. If you miss more than six classes, I advise that you drop the course. I will grant additional free absences in a real emergency that makes you miss more than a week of classes, but no more than six absences over all will be excused under any circumstances. If you really have to miss more than two full weeks of classes, you should drop the course.
Extra credit work: I will not accept extra credit work.
Missed Exams: If you inform me ahead of time that you must miss an exam, I will schedule a makeup time before the exam is given to the rest of the class. It will not be the same exam. If you have some problem that keeps you from making it to an exam, even though you had expected to be there, you will have to explain the matter to me, and I will permit you to take a make-up as soon as possible after the missed exam (later that day, if possible, certainly the next class day unless there are very special circumstances). If you miss an exam and I do not have it explained to me why by midnight the day of the exam, you will receive an F on the exam.
Schedule of Topics and Readings
Topic I: The Ethical Ideal.
I. January 17: Introduction: What is philosophy? Read: Blackburn 1, 5.
January 19: The nature of ethical obligation and motivation. Read: Mackie 561, Dworkin 568, Bambrough 570.
II. January 22: ‘Good’ and ‘Ought.’ Read: Mill 575, Nozick 580.
January 24: Ethical duty as rational obligation. Read: Kant 582, O’Neill 587, Ross 589.
January 26: Ethical duty and cultural context. Read: Rachels 594.
III. January 29: Ethical duty, one’s self and rational behavior. Read: Rachels 594.
January 31: Natural Virtue. Read: Aristotle 610, MacIntyre 619.
February 2: Virtue and the good. Read: Singer 633.
ESSAY 1 DUE: This essay will address the article by Jonathan Bennet 642, using the case of Huckleberry Finn to explore one or more of the theoretical views of ethics presented in the first three weeks, perhaps arguing in support of one against another. Is there a correct solution, ethically speaking, to Huck’s problem? What is it? What view of the nature of ethics does it support? If not, why not? What does this tell us about the ethical theories we have introduced?
IV. February 5: Ethics and the Irrational. Read: Nagel 650, Lewis 661.
February 7: Just distribution. Read: Singer 661, Arthur 675.
February 9: The duty to rescue. Read: O’Neill 685.
Topic II: The Ideal of Justice.
V. February 12: The Pessimist’s Case for Government Authority. Read: Hobbes 705.
February 14: Social Contract and Consent of the Governed. Read: Locke 713.
February 16: Application of Contract Theory to Distributive Justice. Read: Rawls 720.
VI. February 19: The Conservative Rejoinder. Read: Nozick 731.
February 21: The Debate Goes On. Read: Cohen 741, Sandel 751.
February 23: Read: Sandel 751.
ESSAY 2 DUE: This essay will address the article by Debra Satz 759. How should the issues she raises be resolved in terms of the political position you find most plausible concerning free enterprise and just distribution defined in the last two weeks? If you don’t think the theory proposed (any of them) give the right answer, then how does the best theory need to be modified to take the case into account?
Topic III: Does the Ideal Rule the World?
VII. February 26: Ethical Duty and God’s Commands. Plato 13.
February 28: Proofs of God’s existence: The Cosmological Argument. Aquinas 35, Martin 37.
March 2: The Ontological Argument. Anselm 24, Gaunilo 26, Kant 27, Moore 28, Rowe 32.
VIII. March 5: Design and Evil. Hume 39.
March 7: Swinburne 72.
March 9: Cahn 80.
ESSAY 3 DUE: This essay will address the problem of evil, looking at Hume 39 and Cahn 80. The question will be—why is there evil in the world? Give the best answer you can on the assumption that God exists. Now, say we asked why there is good in the world. Give the best answer you can assuming an omnipotent evil power exists. Can it be made out that the reply to the argument from evil against God’s existence cannot be made against the argument from the good concerning the existence of the omnipotently evil being?
SPRING VACATION
IX. March 19: Faith and Reason: Kant. Read: Selections from Kant on Longeway’s Website.
March 21: William James and Mystical Experience. Read: James 82, Martin 93.
March 23: A Theistic Answer? McKim 93.
X. March 26: MIDTERM EXAM
Topic IV: The Ideal of Knowledge.
March 28: Cartesian Knowledge, through Reason and Experience. Read: Introduction 99, Descartes 101, Locke 110.
March 30: The Skeptical Problem: Read: Chisholm 152, Gettier 161.
XI. April 2: Externalism and Reliable Cognition. Read: Goldman 163, Nozick 176.
April 4: Knowledge and Explanatory Coherence. Read: Sosa 188.
April 6: Is Knowledge a Natural Kind? Quine 220, Kim 229.
ESSAY 4 DUE: This essay will address G.E. Moore 137 and Wittgenstein 140. Moore there gives an argument for the existence of the external world. Lay out the argument and discuss its validity. Consider it from the point of view of a Cartesian account of knowledge, and then from the point of view of a externalist account of knowledge. Wittgenstein’s remarks may or may not help you, but they do give an important philosopher’s reaction to Moore’s argument.
Topic V: The Ideal of Truth and Linguistic Meaning.
XII. April 9: Reference and Description. Read: Russell 512.
April 11: Reference versus Description. Read: Kripke 518.
April 13: The Importance of Context. Read: Grice 547.
Topic V: The Ideal of Self: The Mind, Awareness, and Action.
XIII. April 16: Mind and Body. Descartes 432, Smart 443, Fodor 451.
April 18: The Modern Turn to the Problem: Mind and Computer. Read: Turing 460, Searle 475.
April 20: Qualia or Functionalism? Read: Horgan 485, Jackson 490.
XIV. April 23: Action and Freedom. Read: Ayer 401, Chisholm 407.
April 25: Freedom and Responsibility. Read: Frankfurt 414.
April 27: The Free Self and Causal Determination. Read: Van Inwagen 420.
ESSAY 5 DUE: This essay will concern free will. Assume that free will is a naturally occurring thing, as one might assume that knowledge is in the externalist account—that is, consider the possibility that a free action is one open to the question whether it is a justified action. What sort of naturally occurring event might then count as a free action? Could a free action then be causally determined? If so, how? Are there any foundationally justified free actions, or are all justified free actions justified in an externalist way? What about free actions and coherence? (What I want is for you to see how far an analogy between free actions and rational beliefs might be taken. Kant, for instance, and John Rawls, would like to take such an analogy very far. So Kant would equate a morally required action with a necessarily true belief knowable a priori.)
XV. April 30: Is Consciousness an Illusion? Read: Churchland 495, Dennett 498.
May 2: A Question of Identity. Read: Locke 330, Shoemaker 337.
May 4: Is there a Self? Read: Parfit 345.
May 9, 10:30 AM: FINAL EXAM
Advice to Students
Expectations from students: (1) Information to be absorbed: One should be able to state the different positions that can be taken on each question discussed, as well as the question itself and names of the positions or people holding them. One should be able to give the arguments presented for and against each position. Mere ability to recognize the arguments or positions is not enough. You need to be able to state them yourself, and discuss it after laying it out.
(2) Skills to be acquired and demonstrated: (a) Writing. Besides making it understandable and grammatically correct, you should develop some sensitivity to the precise meaning of what you say. You need to distinguish among the various things that could be said and make it clear which you intend. You also need to clarify the consequences of what you say, and clear up possible misinterpretations of what you are saying by distinguishing it from similar positions you don’t hold. You also need to learn the correct use of any technical terms introduced in the course, but for the most part fancy technical language should be avoided as long as you can say what you mean clearly without it. (I’ll try to do that, myself, but your readings won’t always try, and you will get annoyed sometimes when they don’t.)
(b) Argumentation and exploration of issues: You should present reasons for your views, show an understanding of alternative views (this is really important), and why people have held those views (also really important). This means learning the moves made in defense of the various views presented in your readings and in class. You should know when an argument is valid, and how to undermine an invalid argument, making its invalidity clear to the reader. If you disagree with the assumptions of an argument, you should be able to say what assumptions you reject, show how your rejection undermines the argument, and explain why the assumption is to be rejected. In defending your own view you need above all to anticipate and respond sensibly to what may seem reasonable objections to it.
You will observe all this stuff being done in your readings as well as my discussions. Try to imitate. It’s the best way to learn.
Grading of Exams: I will try to give an average of about C+/B- on the exams, but may give a lower or higher average, depending on my assessment of the class’s overall performance. I will decide for each exam on a certain level of performance that deserves an A no matter what the rest of the class does, and I don’t mind giving everyone A’s if everyone reaches that level of performance.
Grading of Papers:
C—Coherently expressed and organized. Presents a view on a defined question at least closely related to the question presented in the topic. Identifies and rejects alternative views. No mistakes about the views presented in the reading and class discussions assigned for the paper due to simple inattention or not having read or listened carefully.
B to A- —In addition, gives the arguments for the view presented in class and the textbook, more or less clearly and completely stated, in the author’s own style and words. All the pieces I ask for in the assignment are there, and they make some sense. Gives the views presented in readings and class correctly even where there is some difficulty understanding them.
A- to A+—In addition, presents new argumentative moves, which are more or less plausible, and deals fairly with opposing views. or Criticizes in new and plausible ways arguments presented in class or readings. or Presents a new view, not considered in class, that answers some problems we have discussed with the views that are presented. or Finds a compromise view between two extreme views discussed in class, establishing that it makes more sense and presenting its advantages.
Reading and lectures: You need to read and listen carefully, making sure you understand each point before going on. Don’t just run the words through your head. If it is making no sense at all, this means either that you need to slow down and work through it more carefully, or that you understand well enough, but have no sympathy with the author’s position. In the latter case, try hard to see how someone might have honest reasons for believing as your author does. You may be assigned a reading by someone who gets all or part of it wrong, but you won’t be assigned a reading by someone who is stupid. Learn what you can at least about why someone might be tempted to adopt the wrong view. Especially, attend to the arguments presented. If you can’t answer the arguments, don’t say the author is stupid.
In reading and listening to lectures, first of all, get the central facts straight. In philosophy, this means, among other things, being able to define any terms of art that come up, being able to state the various positions described on an issue accurately, differentiating them from other possible positions, and being able to state the arguments made and reasons given. This last is extremely important. Don’t look for the list of facts that are known in the field in a philosophy course. You are unlikely to find it.
Study habits: To accomplish all this you have to work. Your Professor can’t possibly cause you to understand just by being really interesting in class. You have to take an interest, not passively hope that it will turn out interesting. You have to go over the material and learn it. This means, first, going over your notes, organizing and rewriting them after class, and rewriting them in such a way that any intelligent person will understand them. You should also take notes on your readings. The best approach is to try to work out what you think on each topic for yourself, and why you think it, and then see how the Professor does in lecture. If he changes your mind, all right. If he fails to respond to points you had thought important, bring them up. If he makes arguments that seem wrong, try to explain to him why they are wrong and see how he responds.