WEEK 1: CARTESIAN SCEPTICISM AND THE COGITO

Transcription

1 Early Modern Philosophy Tutor: James Openshaw 1 WEEK 1: CARTESIAN SCEPTICISM AND THE COGITO Specific references are to the following translation of Descartes primary philosophical writings: SPW: René Descartes: Selected Philosophical Writings (ed.) and (trans.) by J. Cottingham, R. Stoothoff, and D. Murdoch (Cambridge: CUP, 1988). René Descartes: ¾ Synopsis of Second Meditation (SPW 73-74) ¾ Second Meditation (SPW 80-86) ¾ Discourse on the Method IV (SPW 35-36) ¾ Objections and Replies concerning the Cogito (SPW ) P. Markie: The Cogito and its Importance, in J. Cottingham (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Descartes (Cambridge: CUP, 1992). Reprinted in J. Cottingham (ed.) Descartes (Oxford: OUP, 1998). Essay question: What is the form of Descartes Cogito? Is it successful in providing Descartes meditator with his first piece of knowledge? G. Dicker, Descartes: An Analytical and Historical Introduction (Oxford: OUP, 1993), Ch. 2. G. Hatfield, Routledge Philosophy Guidebook to Descartes and the Meditations (Routledge, 2003), Ch. 4. M. Wilson, Descartes (Routledge, 1978), pp J. Hintikka, Cogito ergo sum as an Inference and a Performance (1963), Philosophical Review 72: Also: see J. Hintikka, Cogito ergo sum: Inference or Performance, in Doney (ed.), Descartes: A Collection of Critical Essays, (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1967), pp F. Feldman, On the performatory interpretation of the cogito (1973), Philosophical Review, 82: A. J. Ayer, I think therefore I am, in Doney (ed.), Descartes: A Collection of Critical Essays, (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1967), pp

2 Early Modern Philosophy Tutor: James Openshaw 2 WEEK 2: DESCARTES ARGUMENT FOR DUALISM Specific references are to the following standard translation of Descartes philosophical writings: SPW: René Descartes: Selected Philosophical Writings (ed.) and (trans.) by J. Cottingham, R. Stoothoff, and D. Murdoch (Cambridge: CUP, 1988). René Descartes: ¾ Synopses of the Second and Sixth Meditations (SPW 73-75) ¾ Second Meditation (SPW 80-86, especially 80-83) ¾ Sixth Meditation (SPW ). ¾ Principles of Philosophy Pt. I (the following sections only) (SPW, & ). ¾ Discourse on the Method IV (SPW 36) ¾ Objections and Replies on Meditation Six (SPW ) J. Cottingham, Descartes (Blackwell 1986), Ch. 5. Essay question: What is the most serious objection facing Descartes arguments for the claim that there is a real distinction between the mind and body? Can Descartes conclusion be sustained? G. Hatfield, Routledge Philosophy Guidebook to Descartes and the Meditations (Routledge, 2003), Ch. 8. G. Dicker, Descartes: An Analytical and Historical Introduction (OUP, 1993), Ch. 5. M. D. Wilson, Descartes (Routledge, 1978), pp M. D. Wilson, The epistemological argument for mind-body distinctness, in J. Cottingham (ed.) Descartes (Oxford: OUP, 1998), pp M. Rozemond, Descartes Dualism (Harvard UP, 1998), Ch. 1.

3 Early Modern Philosophy Tutor: James Openshaw 3 WEEK 3: LEIBNIZ ON NECESSITY AND CONTINGENCY Leibniz s views on the topics we will be exploring can only be properly understood by reading a variety of short dispersed texts. Both of the set texts (mentioned above) and the most important of Leibniz s other philosophical works can be found in: AG: Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz: Philosophical Essays (ed.) by R. Ariew and D. Garber (Hackett, 1989). Specific references will be made to this edition. Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz: ¾ On Freedom and Possibility (19-23) ¾ On Contingency (28-30) ¾ On Freedom (94-98) ¾ The Source of Contingent Truths (98-101) ¾ Letter to Coste on Human Freedom (193-96) N. Jolley, Leibniz (Routledge, 2005), Ch. 5. Essay question: How does Leibniz account for the distinction between necessary and contingent truths? How successful is he? R. M. Adams, Leibniz: Determinist, Theist, Idealist (Oxford: OUP, 1994), Ch. 1. B. Mates, The Philosophy of Leibniz (Oxford: OUP, 1988), Ch. 6. D. Fried Necessity and Contingency in Leibniz, Philosophical Review 87 (1978), pp Reprinted in R. Woolhouse, ed., Leibniz: Metaphysics and Philosophy of Science (Oxford: OUP, 1981).

4 Early Modern Philosophy Tutor: James Openshaw 4 WEEK 4: LEIBNIZ S PRE-ESTABLISHED HARMONY Specific references are made to the following standard translation of Leibniz s philosophical writings. AG: Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz: Philosophical Essays (ed.) by R. Ariew and D. Garber (Hackett, 1989). Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz: ¾ Discourse on Metaphysics 33 (64-65) ¾ A New System of Nature (142 to end of 145) ¾ Postscript of a Letter to Beauval (147-49) ¾ Correspondence with Arnauld (81-85) R. S. Woolhouse, Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz (Routledge, 1993), Ch. 9. Essay question: Is pre-established harmony a good solution to the mind/body problem? A. Savile, Routledge Philosophy Guidebook to Leibniz and the Monadology (Routledge, 2000), Ch. 9. S. Brown, Leibniz (Harvester, 1984), Chs R. S. Woolhouse, Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz (Routledge, 1993), Ch. 9. R. S. Woolhouse, Leibniz and Occasionalism in R.S. Woolhouse (ed.) Metaphysics and Science in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries (Kluwer, 1988), pp D. Rutherford, Natures, Laws and Miracles: The Roots of Leibniz s Critique of Occasionalism, in S. Nadler, (ed.), Causation in Early Modern Philosophy (Penn State, 1993), Reprinted in D. Pereboom (ed.) The Rationalists: Critical Essays on Descartes, Spinoza, and Leibniz (Rowman & Littlefield, 1999).

5 Early Modern Philosophy Tutor: James Openshaw 5 WEEK 5: BERKELEY S IMMATERIALISM Specific references are made to the following standard editions of the primary texts. PHK: A Treatise concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge, (ed.) by J. Dancy (OUP, 1998). DHP: Three Dialogues of Hylas and Philonous (ed.) by J. Dancy (OUP, 1998). NB: The introductions to these editions also provide good overviews, and J. Dancy s analyses of each work (PHK and DHP 45-49) are very useful summaries. George Berkeley: ¾ PHK 1-24 ¾ DHP First dialogue J. Dancy, Berkeley (Blackwell, 1987), Chs Essay question: No sensible objects [have] an existence natural or real, distinct from their being perceived by the understanding (Berkeley). Explain the meaning of this claim and evaluate Berkeley s arguments for it. R.J. Fogelin, Routledge Philosophy Guidebook to Berkeley and the Principles of Human Knowledge (Routledge, 2001) Chs K. Winkler, Berkeley: An Interpretation (Clarendon, 1989), Ch. 2. T. Stoneham, Berkeley s World (Oxford: OUP, 2002), Part I. A. C. Grayling, Berkeley (Duckworth, 1986), Ch. 2.

6 Early Modern Philosophy Tutor: James Openshaw 6 WEEK 6: BERKELEY S ACCOUNT OF SCIENCE Specific references are made to the following standard editions of the primary texts. PHK: A Treatise concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge, (ed.) by J. Dancy (OUP, 1998). DHP: Three Dialogues of Hylas and Philonous (ed.) by J. Dancy (OUP, 1998). George Berkeley: ¾ PHK ¾ DHP pp. 241ff J. Dancy, Berkeley (Blackwell, 1987), Chs Essay question: Can Berkeley give an adequate account of science? R. J. Fogelin, Routledge Philosophy Guidebook to Berkeley and the Principles of Human Knowledge (Routledge, 2001), Ch. 7. W. H. Newton-Smith, Berkeley s Philosophy of Science in J. Foster and H. Robinson (eds.) Essays on Berkeley (Oxford: OUP, 1985). M. D. Wilson, Berkeley and the Essences of the Corpuscularians in J. Foster and H. Robinson (eds.) Essays on Berkeley; and also in M. Wilson, Ideas and Mechanism (Princeton UP, 1999). L. Dowling, Berkeley s Natural Philosophy and Philosophy of Science in Winkler (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Berkeley (Cambridge, 2005).

7 Early Modern Philosophy Tutor: James Openshaw 7 WEEK 7: HUME ON CAUSATION Specific references are made to the following standard edition of Hume s Treatise. THN: A Treatise of Human Nature, Book I, (ed.) by L. A. Selby-Bigge. 2nd edition with text revised and variant readings by P. H. Nidditch (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1978). David Hume: ¾ THN Book 1, Part 3 (especially 14) P. Kail, Projection and Realism in Hume s Philosophy (Oxford: OUP, 2007), Chs E. Craig, Hume on causality, pp in R. Read and K. Richman (eds.), The New Hume Debate (Routledge, 2000). Essay question: If I can perceive a knife and perceive a cake, Hume has no good reason for denying that I can perceive a knife cutting a cake. Discuss. G. Strawson, David Hume: Objects and Power, pp in R. Read and K. Richman (eds.), The New Hume Debate (Routledge, 2000). J. P. Wright, Hume s Causal Realism, pp in R. Read and K. Richman (eds.), The New Hume Debate (Routledge, 2000). K. P. Winkler, The New Hume, pp in R. Read and K. Richman (eds.), The New Hume Debate (Routledge, 2000).

8 Early Modern Philosophy Tutor: James Openshaw 8 WEEK 8: HUME ON THE EXTERNAL WORLD Specific references are made to the following standard edition of Hume s Treatise. THN: A Treatise of Human Nature, Book I, (ed.) by L. A. Selby-Bigge. 2nd edition with text revised and variant readings by P. H. Nidditch (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1978). David Hume: ¾ THN Book 1, Part 4, 2. P. Kail, Projection and Realism in Hume s Philosophy (OUP, 2007), Chs Essay question: What is Hume s position on the status of material objects? Do you agree with him? B. Stroud, Hume (Routledge, 1978), Ch. 5. D. Garrett, Cognition and Commitment in Hume s Philosophy (Oxford: OUP, 1997), pp J. P. Wright, The Sceptical Realism of David Hume (Minnesota, 1983), Ch. 2. H. Noonan, Routledge Philosophy Guidebook to Hume on Knowledge (Routledge, 1999), Ch.4. J. Bennett, Learning from Six Philosophers (OUP, 2001), Vol. 2, Ch. 37.