PHIL History of Ethics Spring Meetings Monday/Wednesday/Friday 10-10:50 ARC 3004

Transcription

1 PHIL History of Ethics Spring 2014 Meetings Monday/Wednesday/Friday 10-10:50 ARC 3004 Instructor Kyle Swan Department of Philosophy California State University, Sacramento Mendocino Hall J Street Sacramento, CA (916) kyle.swan@csus.edu Office hours Monday/Wednesday 1-2:30 Reasonable Accommodation If your circumstances require accommodation or assistance in meeting the expectations of this course, please let me know as soon as possible. You may need to provide documentation to the University office of SSWD (in accordance with the University policy outlined here: Description From the catalogue: Investigation of the main approaches to ethics in Western moral philosophy. Emphasis on Plato, Aristotle, Hume, Kant and Mill. Prerequisite: GWAR certification before Fall 09; or WPJ score of 80+; or 3- unit placement in ENGL 109M/W; or 4- unit placement in ENGL 109M/W and co- enrollment in ENGL 109X; or WPJ score 70/71 and co- enrollment in ENGL 109X. More! Prepare yourselves for a no- holds- barred cage match between ancient and modern moral philosophy. The idea in this presentation of the history of ethics is to see ancient views as interlocutors in conversation and (quite often) disagreement with modern views, rather than outdated positions that deserve to be left behind. To get maximum play out of this idea, we ll be discussing the moderns first and, in addition to noting the important differences among social contractarian, utilitarian and duty- based moral theories, also highlight what makes the moderns an apt target for the ancients: the modern/enlightenment emphasis on people s fundamentally equal moral status and their attendant rights and freedoms. Generally speaking, according to ancient views, this sort of emphasis misses something important about the propriety of traditional authority structures, rules and other practices that promote the common good of a well- ordered community. And maybe they re right about that. Let s see.

2 Objectives The course will introduce to students to key historical figures and concepts in ethics. Students will develop an understanding of how philosophers have approached (and, for better or worse, largely still approach) moral philosophy and how they argue to reach conclusions about ethical issues. In addition, students will actually do these things. The course will provide students with resources for reflecting on their own views. It will form a solid foundation for further studies in ethics and philosophy generally, as well as complement other intellectual pursuits. The course aims to contribute to an educational program that produces well- rounded graduates who are not only equipped to achieve excellence in science, business, industry or whatever, but who also care about how their work affects others. Outcomes (1) Students understand how they can employ philosophical tools to address ethical issues. (2) Students understand the history, nature and methods of ethical analysis. (3) Students improve their abilities to think critically, analyze complex problems, evaluate arguments, and argue cogently for their own views. (4) Students improve their reading, writing, and oral communication skills. (5) Students understand some of the leading contemporary positions in political philosophy. Phil 112 is a GE course in area C3. See here: Text All required readings are pieces available on the internet or SacCT. See below. Class procedures and conduct Generally, I will lecture on Monday and Wednesday of each week. These lectures will be fairly scripted, but it won t be out of place for me to pepper you with questions about your reading and you should always feel free to stop me whenever you have a question. Friday meetings will be mostly unscripted (at least, by me). Come to these meetings with one or two written questions, challenges or objections related to material presented or covered in the lecture or the reading assignments that the lecture was based on. I will open the floor or call on students at random to present one of their questions. At the end of the meeting you will submit the paper with your questions on it, which will be used to take roll. Your questions must be such that they give evidence that you have done some careful thinking about the material in order for you to receive attendance credit. Please avoid disrupting class meetings and other ways of being rude. This means that you shouldn t use electronic devices, carry on private conversations with people around you, sleep, read, arrive late or leave early.

3 Schedule January 27, 29, 31 February 3, 5, 7 Introduction Martin Luther, The argument of St. Paul s Epistle to the Galatians and Roger Williams, The Bloody Tenet of Persecution (selections) SACCT 10, 12, 14 Montaigne, Essays, Ch. XXII. Of Custom and Ch. XXX. Of Cannibals. h/3600- h.htm 17, 19, 21 Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan, Chs , , 26, 28 John Locke, The Second Treatise of Government, Chs. 2-9 and A Letter Concerning Toleration, Sections 1-4 and Part II Scottish Enlightenment March 3, 5, 7 David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals, Sections I- IV 10, 12, 14 Adam Smith, Theory of Moral Sentiments Part II/2 and Part III/1-4. Part III Mature Enlightenment 17, 19, 21 Immanuel Kant, Groundwork for the Metaphysic of Morals, Ch. 2 24, 26, 28, 31 Spring Break April 2, 4 Immanuel Kant, Nature as a guarantor of perpetual peace pp , 9, 11 JS Mill, On Liberty, Chs , 16, 18 JS Mill, Utilitarianism Chs. 2 and 5

4 Part IV Brief historiographical interlude 21, 23, 25 Alistair McIntyre, The virtues, the unity of a human life, and the concept of a tradition and JB Schneewind, Modern moral philosophy: from beginning to end? SACCT Part V Pre- modern ethical thought 28, 30, 2 Plato, Republic, 1, 2, 6 and 7 May 5, 7, 9 Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, Books I and II 12, 14, 16 Augustine, City of God, Book V/Ch. 13, 15-16, Book XI/Ch. 1, Book XIV/Ch. 28 and Book XIX/Chs. 4-5, 8, 13-14, 16-17, Assessment Please do not plagiarize or cheat. If you do then at a minimum you will be marked with a zero on the assignment. Multiple and/or flagrant violations will lead to me assigning a failing grade for the course and initiating disciplinary action through the Office of Student Affairs. Familiarize yourselves with the University s Academic Honesty Policies and Procedures document (here: Your final course mark is based on the following: a. preparation for, attendance at and relevant participation in all meetings (15). This includes your submitted questions for Friday discussions. b. reading summaries (15). These are short (no more than 200 words), basic summaries of each assigned reading. They should be thoughtful and grammatical. You need to identify the author s thesis and the basic strategy he or she uses for prosecuting it. They are due before each Monday meeting. You are assigned either 1 point or zero for each entry/summary based on my judgment of the care you took in preparing it. c. 3 short (no more than 1000 words) précis assignments (45). These précis will be based on reading assignments. At least one précis must be based on a reading assignment in Part I. Submit your précis before the Friday meeting of the week we re scheduled to discuss the reading assignment that you ve selected as the basis of your précis. A précis, as I see it, is not simply a point- by- point, blow- by- blow, surface- level summary of the reading assignment. Rather it should be a focused presentation of what you take

5 to be the (or a) key argument the author makes in advancing his or her thesis. Your emphasis should be on clarifying it and explaining how it is supposed to work. Following that, you should also provide some kind of philosophically interesting commentary or reflection or evaluation of the argument that you have presented. It should be presented relatively free of spelling and grammatical errors. I will assign marks based on the accuracy of your presentation and the cogency of your commentary. Spelling and grammatical errors will also affect your grade if they are frequent enough to become distracting. The following resources will be useful: These can be submitted early, but they will normally not be accepted late. If you intended to do a Part I précis on a reading assignment that s due on February 7 th, but miss it, you will have to pick a different reading for Part I. If you miss every chance to submit a précis for Part I, then you will most likely miss the points for that assignment. I may accept still it, but only if there s a documented and legitimate excuse (death in the family or serious illness). d. 1 (no more than 2000 words) philosophical analysis paper (25). See first link under c. above. This is due May 19. a + b + c + d = final course mark Grading scale: 93 and above = A = A = B = B = B = C = C = C = D = D = D- 59 and below = F