| |
Course Descriptions (Fall 2009)
Philosophy 001 / Introduction to Philosophy
Each semester, we offer several sections of Philosophy 001. In all
sections an enrollment maximum is strictly enforced. The sections
are taught as independent classes, each with separate reading lists,
assignments, and examination policies, but the following features
are common to all:
- The classes are small and designed to introduce students to
philosophical thinking through the reading of a few great texts.
- They stress the development of good habits of writing, reading, and
thinking by encouraging critical analysis, philosophical debate and
discussion, and clear, rigorous writing.
- Each section requires at least five short papers, which are
carefully criticized and graded, with attention paid both to
philosophical cogency and style.
- Students having credit for English 001 may use Philosophy 001 to
satisfy the second half of the College Writing Requirement as well
as the Humanities Requirement.
Philosophy 001-01 / Introduction to Philosophy
Gal Kober / L+TR
/ Tuesday, Thursday 4:30 – 5:45
What is knowledge? What can we know? This course is an introduction
to philosophy through seminal questions concerning knowledge. We
will investigate such questions as how we acquire knowledge, what
kinds of knowledge we may have, the ability to articulate our
knowledge, the relation between theoretical and practical knowledge,
and especially the relation between reality and what we can know of
it. We will explore these issues through the writings of major
figures in the history of Western philosophy, such as Plato,
Descartes, Hume, Kant, Wittgenstein, and Moore.
Philosophy 001-02 / Introduction to Philosophy
Gal Kober / N+TR /
Tuesday, Thursday 6:00 – 7:15
What is knowledge? What can we know? This course is an introduction
to philosophy through seminal questions concerning knowledge. We
will investigate such questions as how we acquire knowledge, what
kinds of knowledge we may have, the ability to articulate our
knowledge, the relation between theoretical and practical knowledge,
and especially the relation between reality and what we can know of
it. We will explore these issues through the writings of major
figures in the history of Western philosophy, such as Plato,
Descartes, Hume, Kant, Wittgenstein, and Moore.
Philosophy 001-03
/ Introduction to Philosophy
Jeff McConnell / H+TR / Tuesday, Thursday 1:30 – 2:45
Epistemology is the philosophical study of knowledge. Metaphysics is
the philosophical study of the ultimate character of reality. What
can we know about the ultimate character of reality? This section is
an introduction to epistemology and to metaphysics through the close
reading of important texts from throughout the history of
philosophy. We will examine some central metaphysical problems: What
is the relation between the mind and the body? Do we have free will?
Are our actions causally determined? Why is there something rather
than nothing? What is the origin of the order and of the complexity
in the world? What makes us the same persons over time? What is
truth? How can we know if there is a world outside our minds? Can we
know whether or not there is a God? Throughout the course, we will
be concerned with the relation between metaphysics and epistemology.
In particular, we will be worried about whether there is a
connection between what we can know and what the world is like.
Readings will be drawn from Plato, Aquinas, Descartes, Hume, Kant,
Nietzsche and Russell, but we will also read several contemporary
authors to see how these same questions are treated today. There
will be weekly writing assignments and a final take-home
examination. Philosophy 001-04 / Introduction to Philosophy
Jeff McConnell / L+TR / Tuesday, Thursday 4:30 – 5:45
Description TBA Philosophy 001-04R / Mandatory Film Section
Thursday 7:30 – 9:30
This section is an introduction to philosophy by way of film. In a
sense, films create their own “reality.” What is this thing they
create—“reality”? How do they create it? Do they, in fact, “really”
create it? Philosophers have not until very recently been much
concerned with film, but they have had a longstanding concern with
“reality”—about what it is and about how we can know anything about
it. We will discuss a variety of films, mostly cinema classics made
after 1950, which raise questions about how film itself can “create
a reality.” The films will raise questions as well about some
related philosophical problems: the relation between mind and body,
the existence of the soul and of God, and the nature of existence
itself, of truth and of possibility. The classic status of many of
the films we discuss will be connected to the philosophical
questions they raise; so often we will discuss what these
connections are and why these connections makes them film classics.
Throughout, we will read and discuss classical and contemporary
texts by philosophers that are related to the films. There will be
regular showings of the films to be discussed. Since this is a
writing course, students will be expected to do regular writing
assignments in conjunction with their viewing and reading, and there
will be a final take-home examination.
NOTE: It is required that you attend the film screenings on
Thursdays. Philosophy 001-05 / Introduction to Philosophy
Indrani Bhattacharjee / J+TR / Tuesday, Thursday 3:00-4:15
Description TBA Philosophy 001-06 / Introduction to Philosophy
Neil Van Leeuwen / K+MW /
Monday, Wednesday 4:30 – 5:45
Description TBA. Philosophy 001-07 / Introduction to Philosophy
Benjamin Allen / G+MW / Monday, Wednesday 1:30-2:45
Evil. Beauty. Death. Time. Infinity. We will examine five
philosophically perplexing topics, topics that many of us have
wondered about at one time or another. In each case, we'll start
from scratch, trying to survey the range of questions that might
confront a philosophical investigator. Then we'll proceed to read a
series of writings by philosophers on the given theme.
The goal is to learn to think and write philosophically about ideas
that we have already encountered, but may not have examined. Philosophy 001-09 / Introduction to Philosophy
Indrani Bhattacharjee / F+TR /
Tuesday, Thursday 12:00 – 1:15
Description TBA Philosophy 001-10 / Introduction to Philosophy
Benjamin Allen / I+MW / Monday, Wednesday 3:00 – 4:15
Evil. Beauty. Death. Time. Infinity. We will examine five
philosophically perplexing topics, topics that many of us have
wondered about at one time or another. In each case, we'll start
from scratch, trying to survey the range of questions that might
confront a philosophical investigator. Then we'll proceed to read a
series of writings by philosophers on the given theme.
The goal is to learn to think and write philosophically about ideas
that we have already encountered, but may not have examined. Philosophy 001-11 / Introduction to Philosophy
Valentina Urbanek / E+MW /
Monday, Wednesday 10:30-11:45
Description TBA Philosophy 003 / Language and Mind
Daniel Dennett / GMW / Monday,
Wednesday 1:30 – 2:20
Are we the only species with minds? Do animals--dolphins,
chimpanzees, birds, spiders--have minds, or do they just have
brains? We are the only species with language. Some animals have
what might be called proto-languages, much simpler signaling
systems, but these do not seem to give those species the spectacular
boost in intelligence that language gives us. It is generally agreed
that language makes our minds very different from animal minds, but
how, and why? Are we the only conscious species? Are we the only
self-conscious species? What is it like to be a bat? Is it like
anything to be a spider?
In the first half of the course we will develop a method of
measuring and testing the minds (if that is what they are) of other
species. (The method also works on human beings, but that will not
be our concentration.) We will explore the empirical research, both
in the field and the laboratory, that has recently shed new light on
the questions about animal minds, while sharpening philosophical
questions about the nature of minds in general.
In the second half of the course, we will look at human language,
its structure and evolution, and the effects it has on our minds. We
will look at the traditional philosophical questions about meaning
in language and its relation to mental events, and will eventually
explore the question of the relation of language to human
consciousness.
The course has no prerequisites, and is particularly appropriate for
students who are not likely to major in philosophy but want to get a
substantial introduction to the specific philosophical issues
surrounding the mind-body problem and its relation to language.
Two lectures a week, plus one section (the class will divide into
sections for a Thursday or Friday meeting). Weekly comments pages on
the readings, two problem sets on elementary computer
demonstrations, a midterm examination, a final examination, and a
term paper will be required. Readings will include classic
philosophical essays by Turing, Searle, Nagel, Putnam and others,
and a short book, Daniel Dennett's Kinds of Minds, together with
recent articles and chapters by psychologists, ethologists,
linguists and other researchers. No prerequisites.
Philosophy 006 / Reasoning & Critical Thinking
Susan Russinoff /
J+TR / Tuesday, Thursday 3:00-4:15
Reasoning and Critical Thinking is an introductory course intended
for all students, regardless of academic major or interests. The
skills learned and reinforced in Philosophy 006 are crucial for
anyone who wants to think clearly, read carefully, speak
effectively, and argue convincingly. You will develop a sensitivity
to language, become better able to uncover arguments, and learn to
distinguish good argumentation from bad. Your ability to recognize
and evaluate your own assumptions and those of others will improve,
and you’ll come away better able to provide compelling reasons for
your own views and to evaluate critically the views of others. You
will learn to reason about various subjects, including science,
ethics, philosophy, and the law and have the opportunity to evaluate
and closely analyze articles from a variety of texts and editorials
from leading newspapers and periodicals. In addition to regular
written exercises, the class will engage in oral debate. The tools
you will develop in this course are important to all the
disciplines.
Note: Philosophy 006 cannot be taken for credit by those who have
already taken Philosophy 033. You may take Philosophy 006 and then
take Philosophy 033 for credit. Unlike Philosophy 033, this course
does not satisfy the mathematical sciences requirement.
Philosophy 015 / Introduction to Linguistics
Ariel Goldberg / C /
Tuesday, Thursday, Friday 9:30-10:20
This course focuses on the fundamental question of contemporary
linguistics: How do humans encode language in their brains, so that
they can produce and understand an unlimited variety of utterances
in context. Topics include language and other forms of
communication, how children acquire language, the biological basis
of language, and the structure of language -- phonology (sound
structure), syntax (grammatical structure), and semantics (meaning).
Philosophy 016 / Philosophy of Religion
Elizabeth Lemons / F+TR /
Tuesday, Thursday, Friday 12:00 – 12:50
This course offers an introduction to the philosophical analysis of
major religious issues. We will explore such topics as the nature of
religion, religious experience, an ultimate reality, the problem of
evil or suffering, and the relationship between faith and reason and
between religion and science. By exploring different philosophical
approaches to the study of religion – including existential,
phenomenological, linguistic and comparative, students will develop
constructive responses to the variety of ways in which philosophers
analyze religious beliefs and practices in diverse world religions.
Philosophy 033 / Logic
Susan Russinoff / F / Monday, Wednesday 10:30 – 11:45
*Satisfies Tufts Mathematical Sciences Distribution Requirement
How can one tell whether a deductive argument succeeds in
establishing its conclusion? What distinguishes good deductive
arguments from bad ones? Questions such as these will be addressed
in this course. We will discuss what a formal language is, how
arguments in English are to be expressed in various formal
languages, and what is gained from so expressing them. In the jargon
of the field, we will cover sentential logic, first-order predicate
logic, identity theory, definite descriptions, and topics in
metatheory. The course requires no specific background and no
special ability in mathematics. Philosophy 039 / Knowing and Being
David Denby / H+TR / Tuesday,
Thursday 1:30-2:45
This is a lower-level introduction to epistemology and metaphysics.
It presupposes no previous acquaintance with philosophy.
I've tried to choose topics that are diverse, fundamental and of
contemporary interest. We will concentrate on three or four
metaphysical topics – universals, freewill, change (maybe also
modality) – followed by three epistemological topics – skepticism,
the analysis of knowledge, justification. Other issues may well come
up.
Our approach will be problem-centered rather than historical, and
the emphasis will be on clarity and rigor rather than on scholarship
or sensitivity to historical context. Philosophy 041 / Western
Political Thought I
Ioannis Evrigenis /
G+MW / Monday, Wednesday 1:30-2:45
Central concepts of ancient, medieval, and early modern political
thought. Ideas of Thucydides, Plato, and Aristotle during the rise
and fall of Athens. Subsequent transformations of political
philosophy related to the decline of the Roman Empire and the
origins and development of Christian political doctrine, and the new
political outlook of those who challenged the hegemony of
Christianity. Analysis of how pre-modern political thought helped
structure future political debate. Philosophy 043 / Justice, Equality and Liberty
David Denby / D+TR
/ Tuesday, Thursday 10:30-11:45
This is a lower-level introduction to political philosophy. It
presupposes no previous acquaintance with philosophy.
We will focus on five topics: the state of nature; the
justification, if any, for state power; utilitarianism; distributive
justice; liberalism and its critics. A number of other topics will
come up along the way, including the nature and justification of
free speech, free markets, and private property. All these topics
are linked, and many bear on one of the fundamental questions of
political philosophy: how should a state distribute power and
material goods?
Our approach will be problem-centered rather than historical, and
the emphasis will be on clarity and rigor rather than on scholarship
or sensitivity to historical context. Our discussions will concern
fundamental principles more often than particular issues of
contemporary concern. The reading is drawn from early modern,
nineteenth century, and contemporary sources and is moderate to
heavy in quantity. It will include selections from Hobbes, Locke,
Mill, Marx, Berlin, Rawls, Nozick, Dworkin, Sandel, Cohen, and
others. Philosophy 048 / Feminist Philosophy
Nancy Bauer / K+MW / Monday,
Wednesday 4:30-5:45
*Core Course in the Women's Studies Department
The purpose of this course is to ask whether "feminist philosophy"
is possible and, if so, what it can do and what it is good for. Any
number of prominent feminists believe that in its commitment to what
it calls "objectivity," "universality," and "reason," philosophy
inveterately and insidiously serves the interests of men and is
inherently an enemy of feminism. On the other hand, mainstream
philosophers, who see objectivity, universality, and reason as
paradigmatically neutral values, often worry that political
movements such as feminism, while they may serve lofty purposes,
cannot, by definition, count as philosophy.
The guiding concern of this course will be to explore whether in
fact feminism has any good reason to take an interest in philosophy
-- or traditional philosophy in feminism. We will focus on the
following sorts of questions: Does philosophy have anything special
to offer feminism? Can philosophy be feminist and remain philosophy?
Why can't we, if indeed we can't, explore feminist concerns -- such
as the very possibility of an inherent masculinist bias in some of
our basic practices and concepts -- within traditional philosophical
inquiry? Is there anything philosophically special about oppression
based on gender? Is gender a natural subject for philosophy? What is
gender? What, if anything, does it have to do with people's bodies?
What rides, for feminism andfor philosophy, on the answers to these
sorts of questions?
The syllabus for the course will juxtapose, week by week,
contemporary feminist writings with traditional philosophical texts.
The feminist writings, by such authors as Simone de Beauvoir,
Catharine MacKinnon, Luce Irigaray, Margaret Urban Walker, and
Judith Butler, implicitly or explicitly offer themselves as examples
of or commentaries on the possibility of feminist philosophy. The
traditional philosophical material criticized and appropriated by
our feminist writers will include texts by Descartes, Kant, Hegel,
Marx, Rousseau, Nietzsche, and Freud -- authors who, ironically in
this context, understood themselves to be working generally in
service of human liberation.
Prerequisites: No previous experience with any of the authors
mentioned above, or with philosophy or feminist theory in general,
is necessary or will be presupposed. Philosophy 103 / Logic
George Smith / J / Monday 4:30-5:20; Tuesday,
Thursday, Friday 3:00-3:50
How can one tell whether a deductive argument succeeds in
establishing its conclusion? What distinguishes good deductive
arguments from bad ones? Questions like these will be addressed in
this course. The principal text will be Richard Jeffrey's Formal
Logic, though it will be supplemented by other texts and by notes
from the instructor. The accent will be as much on coming to
understand what the word ‘formal' means in the title of Jeffrey's
book as on what ‘logic' means. We will discuss what a formal
language is, how arguments in English are to be expressed in various
formal languages, and what is gained from so expressing them. In the
jargon of the field, we will cover sentential logic, first order
predicate logic, identity theory, and definite descriptions. We will
also look briefly at the history of logic.
The course requires no specific background and no special ability in
mathematics. Understanding why formal methods work will be as
important as manipulating them. The course will require six written
homework assignments and an open-book final exam. The homework
assignments, which students are expected to work on in groups, form
the core of the course. Students should anticipate spending an
average of eight hours per week outside of class in this course.
Philosophy 111 / Semantics
Ray Jackendoff / G+MW / Monday,
Wednesday 1:30 – 2:45
This course concerns the structure of meaning as it is encoded in
human language and processed by the human brain. Topics include:
mentalistic theories of sense and reference, word meanings,
combining word meanings into phrasal meanings, aspects of meaning
not conveyed by words. Prerequisite: Phil 15 or consent.
Philosophy 121 / Ethical Theory
Erin Kelly / D+TR / Tuesday,
Thursday 10:30-11:45
The course will examine a range of philosophical views about the
nature and content of morality. The main theoretical approaches we
will study are consequentialism, Kantianism, virtue ethics, and
constructivism. Generally, we will explore the relation between
morality and self-interest, and between morality and values with
which it may conflict (e.g. friendship, integrity).
Questions to be considered include: Why be moral? Should the
rightness of actions be judged by their results or by
noninstrumental principles? Does morality depend on social
conventions or are certain values universal? Course readings will be
drawn from Mill, Kant, Williams, Rawls, and others.
Philosophy 125 / Racism and Social Inequality
Lionel McPherson / F+TR / Tuesday, Thursday 12:00 – 1:15
This course will divide its focus between conceptual and practical
issues concerning race. We will begin by asking whether race is
essentially a biological category and what difference this might
make. We will then set the conceptual questions in a more practical
context, with an emphasis on the function of race and ethnicity in
the U.S. Some attention will be paid to current policy debates
surrounding affirmative action, reparations, and racial/ethnic group
recognition. Readings will include DuBois, Gould, Appiah, West, and
Loury.
Prerequisite: 1 Phil Course, or 1 Political Science Course.
Philosophy 131 / Epistemology
Stephen White / I+MW / Monday,
Wednesday 3:00 – 4:15
It seems plausible to suppose that all of our substantive
information about the external world comes from the senses. But the
connection between events in the external world and our perceptual
experiences is causal and contingent. Thus we could have exactly the
same perceptual experience even if the world were radically
different--even if, for example, we were brains in vats or were
dreaming. Indeed, it seems, we could have the same perceptual
experience even if the external world did not exist. Furthermore, it
seems that any principle that could take us from what we are given
in perception to the nature of the external world would simply beg
the question against a certain kind of radical skeptic. That is, it
would beg the question against a skeptic who claimed that we could
never have any rational justification for preferring any hypothesis
about the external causal source of our perceptual experience over
any other. For to suppose that any such principle were justified
would be to suppose that we were already justified in believing
something about the world beyond our perceptual experience.
Many contemporary philosophers (the so-called new Humeans – e.g.,
Stroud, Nagel, and Strawson) find this kind of argument impossible
to answer. Moreover, they hold that in considering skeptical
possibilities we are doing nothing different from what we do in our
ordinary epistemic assessments. Such philosophers claim, however,
that skepticism has no practical implications. But how could these
three claims all be true? Certainly our ordinary assessments about
what we know and what we are justified in believing are directly
relevant to what we do and what we take ourselves to be justified in
doing. How, then, can our philosophical reflections fail to have
such consequences if we are doing what we ordinarily do and not
arbitrarily raising the standards for what we consider knowledge or
justification?
Now consider a radically different form of skepticism. Imagine
someone who (perhaps after suffering some extreme trauma) suddenly
finds the concept of action unintelligible. Such a person might
agree with us about all the objective facts about the world--what
has happened, is happening, will happen--but utterly fail to make
sense of the idea of anyone doing anything. This form of skepticism,
which we might call agential skepticism, is extremely practical in
its implications. We can in fact imagine the person in question
paralyzed not by nerve or tissue damage, but by his or her sheer
incapacity to comprehend the idea of intervening to change the
course of events (as opposed merely to being a passive part of the
mechanism through which the causal forces of the universe flow).
Finally, imagine a third form of skepticism according to which
nothing is really valuable. On this view there are no genuinely
valuable objects or events in the world, merely our desires,
projections, illusions of value, and so forth. (This may seem to
some like obvious common sense rather than skepticism.) In this case
the practical implications of skepticism are not clear. Would it
make a difference if we believed that some things were not merely
desired but were desirable (i.e., were such as to justify desire)?
In this course we will examine a range of standard epistemological
topics from the perspective of the new Humean response to
skepticism, as well as some skeptical issues normally treated
outside the epistemological context. Topics will include our
knowledge of the external world, of the past and the future, of
meaning, and of other minds. We will also consider the problems
raised by foundationalism and coherentism, and internalism and
externalism. As regards these latter two concepts expecially, we
will consider the issues they raise in epistemology in part by
comparison with the issues they raise in a variety of other
philosophical contexts. Philosophy 134 / Philosophy of Social Science
Brian Epstein / I+MW
/ Monday, Wednesday 3:00 – 4:15
This course is an introduction to the philosophy of social science.
The course will consider central problems in the nature and methods
of the social sciences, focusing in particular on how the social
sciences (like economics, sociology, psychology, political science,
and history) differ from the natural sciences (like physics,
chemistry, and biology). We will begin with some of the historical
debates that accompanied the founding of the social sciences, and
then turn to contemporary questions having to do with explanation,
objectivity and values, and the nature of social groups.
Philosophy 151 / Ancient Philosophy
Benjamin Allen / F+TR /
Tuesday, Thursday 12:00-1:15
We'll begin with the presocratic philosophers, who sought to find
order in a changing cosmos. We'll pay particular attention to the
ways in which each philosopher responds to his predecessors. Then
it's on to Socrates and Plato. We'll focus on life, death, and love.
In doing so, we'll take a close look at philosophical methodology
and at Plato's vision of an unchanging reality. Finally we'll
consider Aristotle, who sought a coherent view of the cosmos and the
human place within it. We'll consider how the disparate pieces of
his philosophy fit together to form a systematic whole.
In examining Greek philosophy, we will focus on the past and the
present, seeking to understand the ancient philosophers within their
own historical context, while also thinking for ourselves about
their viability even today. Philosophy 167 / Science Before Newton
George Smith / 11 / Tuesday
6:30 – 9:00
This is the first part of a two-course sequence focusing on Newton's
Principia, the book that first showed the world how to do science in
the modern sense of the term. In Philosophy 168 in the spring
semester we will read the Principia itself. The revolution produced
by the Principia is undoubtedly the most important single event in
the history of science, ending controversies begun by the Copernican
model of the planetary system and leading over the next 60 years to
what we now call Newtonian mechanics. It produced no less of a
revolution in scientific method by illustrating a way of marshalling
evidence that stood in sharp contrast to both the narrow empiricist
line then prevalent in England and the rationalist line prevalent on
the continent. Because of this, the Principia is as important to
philosophy of science as it is to history of science. It is the
perfect work to focus on in investigating how science at its best
succeeds in turning data into decisive evidence.
The Principia is accessible to a wide range of students. It requires
no background in physics or calculus. It does, however, require
historical knowledge of the scientific context in which it was
written. Thus, the goal of the fall semester is to cover the
background needed to grasp the force of the evidential arguments in
the Principia. We will review the work on planetary orbits by Kepler
and those after him; Galileo’s efforts toward a science of motion;
Descartes’ theory of planetary motion; and studies of curvilinear
motion by Huygens and Newton that led directly into the Principia.
Three 6 to 8 page papers will be required during the fall semester.
In the spring semester we will examine the evidential argument
developed throughout the Principia and responses to it. The sole
written requirement will be a term paper dealing with one of the
major historical or philosophical issues surrounding the work.
Studying the Principia can be of value to a wide range of students.
Besides offering an ideal way of studying the philosophy of science,
it gives history students a vehicle for getting into the history of
science. It offers students in the physical sciences and engineering
an opportunity to learn how the foundations of their disciplines
were secured. And it offers students in the humanities a way of
studying what science is like from the inside, where the fundamental
problem is not to obtain data, but to find ways of turning data into
evidence. Science distribution credit is given for the spring
semester.
Prerequisites: Junior standing or consent.
Philosophy 191-01 / Seminar: Ordinary Language
Avner Baz / 13 /
Thursday 6:30 – 9:00
There was a time, a little more than 50 years ago, when a new form
of philosophizing -- generally referred to as "ordinary language
philosophy" -- was taken to hold the promise of a fresh start, or
turn, in philosophy, and of a way out of debates that, though
typically presenting themselves as in the business of making
philosophical progress, have come to be seen, by some at least, as
leading nowhere. The new philosophical approach was associated
mainly with the names of John Austin and Ludwig Wittgenstein.
Ordinary Language Philosophy (OLP) involves a critique of the
tradition of western philosophy that proceeds from a consideration
of the normal and ordinary use of philosophically troublesome words
like ‘know’, ‘understand’, ‘mean’, ‘see’, ‘true’, ‘free" ... And it
has an ethical, existentialist, dimension that was just as alien to
the spirit of the Anglo-American philosophy of mid 20th century as
it is alien to the spirit of contemporary mainstream analytic
philosophy.
Nowadays ordinary language philosophy (hereafter OLP), whether in
its Wittgensteinian form or in its Austinian form, is widely
taken—especially in the United States—to have somehow been brought
to disrepute. Many philosophers who work within the mainstream of
analytic philosophy take it that OLP may safely be ignored.
The premise of this seminar will be that those who dismiss OLP have
not (yet) entitled themselves to that dismissal. This is partly due
to the fact that it is very difficult to say what exactly OLP is
(about).
We will begin by reading and discussing John Austin’s ‘Other Minds’
and Peter Strawson’s ‘Truth’, with the aim of forming an initial
sense of OLP’s approach to the resolution of philosophical
difficulties. We will then look closely at, and assess, the main
lines of argument that have been brought against OLP.
In the second part of the course we will reverse direction. Instead
of assessing the prevailing arguments against OLP, we will consider
how its approach might be brought to bear on two central debates in
contemporary analytic philosophy: The debate concerning the reliance
on ‘intuitions’ in philosophical theorizing, and the debate between
‘contextualists’ and ‘anti-contextualists’ with respect to our
concept of propositional knowledge.
In addition to the papers by Austin and Strawson we shall read texts
by Wittgenstein, Geach, Grice, Searle, Soames, Stanley, Stich,
Cummins, Williamson, Travis, Recanati, Lewis, DeRose, Cohen,
Hawthorne, and Kant, among others. Philosophy 191-02 / Seminar: Metaphysics of Material Objects
Brian
Epstein / 10 / Monday 6:30 - 9:00
This seminar will focus on a central issue in contemporary
metaphysics: the nature of material objects. We will examine in
detail theories of the relation between an object and its parts, the
essential properties of material objects, and the persistence of
objects over time. Philosophy 191-03 / Seminar: Contemporary Relativism
Mark Richard
/ 8 / Thursday 1:30 – 4:00
After a long dry spell, relativism is fashionable in analytic
philosophy. Driven in good part by issues in semantics and the
philosophy of language, philosophers have recently argued that we
must give relativistic accounts of the way we talk about knowledge,
matters of taste, possibility, and much more.
In this seminar we will first look at the background of contemporary
relativism in the work of David Kaplan and David Lewis in the 1980s.
We will then look closely at three test cases for relativistic
accounts of thought and talk: Tense (Can what we say change truth
value over time, and so be true-for-me today but false-for-you
tomorrow?), matters of taste (Can we disagree about whether Mr. X is
handsome, yet both be right?), and epistemic relativism (Do claims
of knowledge and justification, as philosophers like Richard Rorty
argue, make sense only relative to more or less arbitrary
criteria?).
Because what drives contemporary relativism are considerations from
semantics and philosophy of language, some background in logic is
required. (Some knowledge of linguistics wouldn’t hurt, but none
will be assumed.) Readings will include work by Boghossian, Cappelen
and Hawthorne, MacFarland, Recanati, and Richard. The course
requires a five page paper, a brief presentation, and a final ten
page paper. Prerequisites are two courses in philosophy, including a
logic course. Philosophy 195-01 / Topics: Aesthetic Psychology
Stephen White / M+MW / Monday, Wednesday 6:00 – 7:15
The term 'aesthetic psychology' bears the same relation to modern
aesthetic theory that the expression 'moral psychology' bears to
first order moral theories. In both cases we refer to a meta-level
investigation--in moral psychology the investigation of the
psychological conditions of our meaningful use of normative and
evaluative language, in aesthetic psychology of our meaningful use
of terms such as 'beautiful' or 'sublime.'
In this course, we will focus on the psychological presuppositions
of modern aesthetic theory, including that of Romanticism,
Modernism, and Postmodernism. And the central psychological issue in
all three cases is that of the productive imagination. This,
according to romantic theory, is the creative power of the mind that
grounds our notion of reality and gives us our vocation--as artists
and non-artists alike--to transform what we are given in experience.
This means, as Charles Larmore has written, "making whole what has
been broken asunder," and "pursuing correspondences where divisions
were thought to exist."
This romantic conception of the productive imagination gives us the
conception of a vocation of art in a very strong sense--a conception
according to which art plays a (or the) fundamental role in human
existence and one which among all human activities it is uniquely
qualified to play. And despite the fundamental differences between
the romantic, modernist, and postmodernist perspectives, some such
conception of the productive imagination runs through all three.
It is inevitable that we should ask, then, what sense we can make
(in the context of analytical philosophy and contemporary
psychology) of such a conception of the imagination. How is such
conception related to such notions as theory-laden perception in
philosophy of science, contemporary work in experimental psychology
in the traditions established by Michotte and J. J. Gibson, the
neurophysiologically informed clinical observations of Oliver Sacks,
the continental traditions of phenomenology associated with
Heidegger, Sartre, and Merleau-Ponty, or the Freudian and Lacanian
conceptions of the development of the self.
We will pursue these questions by reference in connection with a
wide range of works of art, many of them deeply influenced by
romantic and post-romantic aesthetic theory, including works of
filmmakers Ridley Scott, Terrence Malick, Nicholas Roeg, and Park
Chan Wook, novelists Dostoyevsky and Paul Auster, and multi-media
and performance artists Joseph Beuys and Matthew Barney.
Philosophy 197 / Ethics, Law and Society
Erin Kelly and Lionel
McPherson / J+TR / Tuesday, Thursday 3:00-4:15
This course forms the core of a new certificate program in Ethics,
Law and Society, administered through the philosophy department. The
goal of the program is to use philosophy to prepare students to be
active citizens in leadership positions in government, NGOs and the
private sector. Students will learn about how moral and political
philosophy relate to questions of public importance.
The seminar will study a range of practical ethical questions
concerning three basic themes: (1) morality across boundaries; (2)
criminal justice, moral responsibility, and the aims of punishment;
(3) terrorism and just war; (4) multiculturalism and religious
toleration.
We will approach these questions by considering case studies and by
evaluating moral principles for resolving ethical dilemmas. We will
be especially concerned with the challenges to ethical thought posed
by ethnic, religious, and political diversity.
Requirements for the course include several short papers and an
individual research project.
The Student Services website provides a search for a
complete list of course descriptions. Please note that
this is a comprehensive list; not all of the courses will be offered
in any one semester.
|
