1 PL 305: Modern Philosophy -- the Origin of the Modern Mind Fall of 2012, Juniata College Instructor: Dr. Xinli Wang, philosophy department, wang@juniata.edu, x-3642 (O) Office Hours: Good-Hall 414, MWF 10-11, TuTh 11-12, and by appointments Texts Required: 1. Modern Philosophy: an anthology of primary sources, eds. Roger Ariew & Eric Watkins, Hackett Publishing Company, 2 nd edition, 2009 [MP] 2. Bacon to Kant: an introduction to modern philosophy, 3 rd edition, Garrett Thomson, Waveland Press, 2012 [BK] 3. A.P. Martinich, Philosophical Writing, 2 nd edition, Blackwell Publishing 1996 [PW] 4. Handouts on P: drive (Wang s folder) Content and Format The conceptual revolution of the 17 th century and its consolidation and subsequent cultural revolution during the 18 th century were perhaps the most profound intellectual and cultural transformation of the Western civilization. It marks the birth of the modern mind (the conceptual core of modernity), a new way of thinking about the world and about thinking, such as what is a legitimate authority or a proper mode of justification, what is morally right, what is real, how thing happened, what is knowable, and what is the potential of human life and human relationship to nature, etc. Such a conceptual and cultural revolution was associated most clearly with the scientific revolution during the 17 th century. Philosophy is thinking about the way of thinking. The best way to understand the birth of the modern mind is to study the metaphysical foundation of all these intellectual/cultural transformations, that is, modern philosophy, which and modern science were the twin founding pillars of modern thought and modern culture. The course is designed, firstly, to provide you with an overview of the dominant theories and conceptual tensions that shaped Western philosophical discussions during the modern period; secondly, to acquaint you first-hand with the canonical texts around which that discussion centered. We will trace the origin of the modern mind through careful examination of its philosophical and scientific foundations. Works of modern philosophers (Bacon, Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz, Locke, Berkeley, Hume, and Kant) are analyzed and interpreted in the broad historical context of the rise of modern science (Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, Boyle, and Newton) with emphasis on the problem of the source, the scope, the limit, and the validity of rational knowledge. Our classes will comprise both lectures and discussion periods. Lectures will generally situate problems or positions within an intellectual context and identify some significant philosophical issues from the classical texts that will be discussed extensively among us. Course Objectives Upon completion of this course, you should be able to: Understand the conceptual and cultural revolutions and the birth of the modern mind during the 17 th and the 18 th centuries. Give an account of the revolution in epistemology and ontology that most changed the ways in which the Europeans thought about their world. Become acquainted with the works of the major philosophers of the modern time and understand their positions on key issues and the questions that dominated in Western philosophy during the modern time. Understand how modern philosophy, with the rise of modern science, sets the foundation for the formation and development of the modern mind. Develop facility in employing philosophical methods, terms, concepts, and arguments. Course Requirements and Expectations
2 1. Attendance and participation (10 %) Attendance: class attendance is mandatory. It will be some deduction from your course grade for lectures you miss without good excuses. Readings: reading assignments will be made on a daily basis, more or less in keeping with the course outline provided below. You are strictly required to complete all of the assigned readings before each class. It is a good idea to take notes and raise questions as you read. Participation: you should be prepared to participate in the class discussion of assigned readings. 2. Pop-quizzes and small group discussions (10 points) There may be a few pop quizzes at the very beginning of some classes on the reading assignments (just to make sure that you do read them). We will have many formal small-group discussions based on assigned questions in class. Your group performance will be evaluated. 3. One group presentation (10 points) Each student will be asked to give a brief presentation of one of the readings of the day (about 10-15 minutes long) and lead a class discussion afterward (maybe another 10 to 15 minutes) 4. Writing assignments (70 points) Assignment #1 on Descartes (10 points) write a 5-page critical (evaluative/argumentative) essay on one of Descartes Meditations. For the format of the essay, please refer to WL, 41-51. Assignment #2 on Spinoza or Leibniz (10 points) write a 6-page critical (evaluative/argumentative) essay on Spinoza s Ethics or Leibniz s philosophy Assignment #3 on Locke AND Berkeley (15 points) write a 7-page comparative essay on Locke and Berkeley. Assignment #4 on Hume and others (15 points) write an 8-page synthesis (thesis defense) essay of your position on one significant controversial issue addressed by Hume and other modern philosophers studied so far. For the format of the essay, please refer to WL, 52-69. Assignment #5 on Kant (20 points) write a 12-15 page research paper on a philosophical issue discussed by Kant (and others) in which you are most interested and is philosophically significant in your own judgment. For the format of the essay, refer to WL, ch. 8. Rewrite options: you could rewrite two essays out of essays #2, #3, #4, and #5. If you do choose to rewrite, each version will count as 50% of the grade for the essay. Rewrites will be accepted within seven days after your first version is distributed. For more information on philosophy writing, please refer to Philosophy department website http://departments.juniata.edu/philosophy/links.html for How to write a philosophy paper under Philosophy Research and Learning Tools. A late essay will result in a grade penalty. Writing Objectives and Implements This is an advanced philosophy CW course. The CW portion of the course is designed for students to improve their philosophy writing (philosophy-specific content writing, not simply writing in general). For the writing goals and the criteria by which students writing assignments are evaluated, please see appendix I for details. We will use A.P. Martinich s Philosophical Writing as the basis of class discussions on effective philosophical writing. Special attention will be given to the format of analytic, argumentative writing (during class discussion on writing) and the art of revising and rewrite (through peer review and editing and individual faculty-student conferences). As such, we will devote significant amount of our class time to discuss and guide students to write philosophy essays through a variety of methods, including (a) class discussions on philosophy writing; (b) student
3 peer review and editing of each other s drafts of short essays, (c) individual faculty-student essay conferences to discuss one or two of students four short essays. Policies: 1. Withdrawal: you can withdraw from the course at any time before or on the last day of classes, Friday, 12/7/2012 if we both agree that it is in your best interest. 2. Learning Difference: the Americans Disabilities Act mandates accessibility in all aspects of the learning environment. If you have an identified disability and are in need of specific accommodations, please notify the Office of Academic Support Services in Founders Hall and discuss your needs with me at the beginning of the semester. 3. Academic integrity: The College considers academic integrity one of the foundation stones of a liberal arts education and asks all students to use good sense and judgment in preparing and submitting material for examination and evaluation. Particularly at mid-semester and semester's end, under work and deadline pressure, students may make false assumptions or uninformed decisions that could lead to a charge of academic dishonesty. (from the provost office website) Tentative Class Schedule (very ambitious) Week 1 (8/23) 1. Introduction: the Spirit of Modern Philosophy Th The medieval outlook vs. the modern outlook: (1) Lawhead, Introduction to the Modern Voyage (P: drive); (2) Thomson, in BK, pp. 1-8 Week 2 (8/28-30) Tu The dawn of the 17 th century: the historical and cultural context - General introduction: (1) Lawhead, Cultural Context: Renaissance, Reformation, and the Rise of Modern Science (P: drive); (2) Ariew & Watkins, in MP, pp. vii-x - Optional: (1) Aristotelian scholasticism: Lindberg, Aristotle s philosophy of nature (P: drive); (2) The new cosmology: Leon, The 17 th century Revolution in Physical Science (P: drive) 2. René Descartes (1596-1650): the Founder of Modern Philosophy Th (1) Descartes, Meditations on First Philosophy I & II, in MP, pp. 1-3, 33-47; (2) Thomson, in BK, pp. 9-13, & ch. 1 Week 3 (9/4-6) Tu (1) Descartes, Meditations on First Philosophy, III&V, in MP, pp. 47-54, 58-61; (2) Thomson, in BK, ch. 2 Th (1) Descartes, Meditations on First Philosophy, IV&VI, in MP, pp. 54-58, 61-68; (2) Thomson, in BK, ch. 3 Weekly reading and discussion on writing #1: PW chapter 1 Week 4 (9/11-13) 3. Baruch Spinoza (1632-1677): God, Mind, and Freedom Tu (1) Spinoza, The Ethics, part I, in MP, pp. 111-113, 144-164; (2) Thomson, in BK, pp. 52-53, & ch. 4 Th (1) Spinoza, The Ethics, part II (up to prop 23), in MP, pp. 164-175; (2) Thomson, in BK, ch. 5 Writing assignment #1 on Descartes due on Th (9/13) Week 5 (9/18-20) TuTh (1) Spinoza, The Ethics, part II (from prop 24) & V, in MP, pp. 175-195; (2) Thomson, in BK, ch. 6 Weekly reading and discussion on writing #2: PW chapter 2 (pp. 18-39) Week 6 (9/25-27) 4. Gottfried Leibniz (1646-1716): Monad, God and Reason Tu (1) Leibniz, Primary Truth, in MP, pp. 265-268; (2) Leibniz, Discourse on Metaphysics, in MP, pp. 197-199, 224-242 (sect. 1-29); (2) Thomson, in BK, pp. 80-2 & ch. 7 & 8
4 Th (1) Leibniz, Discourse on Metaphysics, in MP, pp. 234-247 (sect. 30-36); (2) Leibniz, A New System of Nature and, in MP, pp. 269-274; (3) Thomson, in BK, ch. 9 Weekly reading and discussion on writing #3: PW chapter 2 (pp. 39-51) Week 7 (10/2-4) Tu (1) Leibniz, the Monadology, in MP, pp. 275-283; (2) Thomson, in BK, pp. 109-112 5. John Locke (1632-1704): Revolution in Knowledge Th (1) Locke, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, in MP, pp. 305-307, 316-322 (book I), 322-342 (Book II, ch. I-XII); (2) Thomson, in BK, pp. 113-115, 145-147, & ch. 13 Weekly reading and discussion on writing #4: PW chapter 3 Week 8 (10/9-11) Tu (1) Locke, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, in MP, pp. 348-367 (book II, ch. XXI-XXIII); (2) Thomson, in BK, ch. 14 Th (1) Locke, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, in MP, pp. 367-377 (book II, ch. XXVII; review book I, i, 9-20); 377-386 (book III); (2) Thomson, in BK, ch. 15 Writing assignment #2 on Spinoza or Leibniz due on Th (10/11) Week 9 (10/16-18) Tu Locke, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, in MP, pp. 386-415 (book IV) 6. George Berkeley (1685-1753): to be is to be perceived Th (1) Berkeley, Principles of Human Knowledge, in MP, pp. 435-437, 436-453; (2) Thomson, in BK, pp. 200-201, & ch.17 Weekly reading and discussion on writing #5: PW chapter 4 Week 10 (10/23-25) Tu Fall break! Th (1) Berkeley, Three Dialogues, in MP, pp. 454-484 (dialogues I & II); (2) Thomson, in BK, ch. 18 Weekly reading and discussion on writing #6: PW chapter 5 (pp. 96-119) Week 11 (10/30-11/1) Tu Berkeley, Three Dialogues, in MP, pp. 484-503 (dialogues III) 7. David Hume (1711-1776): Empirical Naturalism Th (1) Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, in MP, pp. 509-11, 533-564 (sect. I-VII); (2) Thomason, in BK, pp. 226-228, & ch. 19 & 20 Weekly reading and discussion on writing #7: PW chapter 5 (pp. 119-142) Week 12 (11/6-8) Tu Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, in MP, pp. 565-575 (sect. VIII, X) Writing assignment #3 on Locke and Berkeley due on Tu (11/6) Th (1) Hume, A Treatise on Human Nature, in MP, pp. 517-525 (book I, part 4, sect. 5); (2) Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, in MP, pp. 586-596 (sect. XI, XII, part i) Week 13 (11/13-15) Tu (1) Hume, A Treatise on Human Nature, in MP, pp. 525-532 (book I, part 4, sect. 6); (2) Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, in MP, pp. 593-600 (sect. XII); (3) Thomson, in BK, ch. 21, pp. 274-278 8. Immanuel Kant (1724-1804): Copernican Revolution in Philosophy Th (1) Kant, Prolegomena, in MP, pp. 655-660, 661-672 (preface, sect. 1-5); (2) Taschek, Kant (P: drive), pp. 248-254; (3) Thomson, in BK, pp. 279-283, 298-300 Weekly reading and discussion on writing #8: PW chapter 6 Week 14 (11/20-22) Tu (1) Kant, Prolegomena, in MP, pp. 672-679 (sect. 6-13); (2) Taschek, Kant (P: drive), pp. 254-264; (3) optional: Thomson, BK, ch. 24 (on the Critique of Pure Reason)
5 Writing assignment #4 on Hume and others due on Tu (11/20) Th Thanksgiving break! Week 15 (11/27-29) Tu (1) Kant, Prolegomena, in MP, pp. 679-695 (sect. 14-39); (2) Taschek, Kant (P: drive), 264-272; (3) optional: Thomson, in BK, ch. 25 & 26 (on the Critique of Pure Reason) Th (1) Kant, Prolegomena, in MP, pp. 695-706 (sect. 40-56); (2) optional: Thomson, in BK, ch. 27 (on the Critique of Pure Reason) Weekly reading and discussion on writing #9: PW chapter 7 Week 16 (12/4-6) Tu Kant, Prolegomena, in MP, pp. 706-716 (sect. 57-59, scholium) Th Reserved for catch up Writing assignments #5 on Kant due on Tu (12/11) Appendix I: Standards for Student Philosophy Writing 1. Guiding Principles (goals of philosophy writing) Conceptual Coherence. Students works are expected to meet high standards of clarity in their use of terms and concepts. Their arguments should reflect coherence in their logical progression. Originality. Superior work must not only be clear and coherent, but also its approach to its subject must be novel and interesting. The ability to develop relevant examples and to grasp the significance of a philosophical problem to issues of everyday life is signs of originality. Factual competence. The statements of students should be free of erroneous claims of fact. Their statements should correctly state the claims and arguments of the philosophers to whom they refer, and provide evidence of any controversial or contested factual claims. Spelling and grammar. Correct grammar is essential to successful verbal expression, and both spelling and grammar are crucial in philosophical writing. Philosophical arguments depend upon precision and clarity to draw their conclusions effectively. It is impossible for a student's interlocutors to determine whether their arguments are coherent if they employ ungrammatical sentence structure, or if they use words incorrectly or ambiguously. Usually, teachers of philosophy require that material be grammatically flawless, or close to flawless, in order to be acceptable. 2. Grading Rubric (1) Clarity, relevance, and plausibility of thesis The topic of the paper is clear and appropriate for the topic and thesis. The paper has a clear thesis or position that is relevant to the assignment. (2) Clarification of central concepts Key concepts are clearly defined, analyzed, or explained. Helpful examples are provided. (3) Understanding The paper demonstrates familiarity with the relevant philosophical literature as required by the classes. The paper shows accurate understanding of the philosophy works covered by the classes. Overall, the author demonstrates a clear understanding of the topic.
6 (4) Argumentation Clear arguments for the thesis are presented effectively. The paper demonstrates a sustained philosophical argument. Relevant objections to the thesis are considered and evaluated. (5) Organization The paper is well organized and has a clear follow of reasoning and arguments The paper includes all necessary components of a typical philosophy paper as specified in appendix II. The ideas and arguments presented in the paper are conceptually coherent. (6) Originality The paper presents some original idea, alternative interpretation and analysis of a classical philosophical issue, unique argument for an established position, or shows a fresh way of presenting a traditional philosophical problem, and so on. (7) Articulation and mechanics The writing is clear and effective. The writing is free of grammatical errors, misspells, and typos. Footnotes or endnotes are clearly presented if necessary. The paper includes an acceptable bibliography. All sources used by the paper are properly credited and cited in both footnotes and bibliography (academic honesty). Thesis Clarification Understanding Argumentation Organization Originality Articulation and mechanics A B C D F 3. Grading Scale Exceptional (A): Your input is original. You have seen something no one else has seen in this work (or a topic), and done a great job explaining and justifying it. You write with grace. (In the case of a research paper, you have read a reasonable amount of literature on the topic). Very Good (A- / B+): An interesting and creative insight into the work (or the topic) as a whole, and the insight is well supported by your arguments. Your writing is well organized. You waste no words and choose right words to express your meaning. (In the case of a research paper, you have consulted a few related other works not covered in our reading assignments). Good (B / B-): Between Very Good and Average. (In the case of a research paper, your readings are not restricted to our reading assignments). Average (Cs): You have done a modest good job summarizing and interpreting the work. The paper is organized. Your writing is mainly free of errors in grammar, spelling, and usage, and it is clear enough that
7 readers can follow your writing with ease. (For a research paper, you do not read anything beyond our reading assignments). Below Average (Ds): The paper says too little, says nothing significant, or is filled with confusions and misunderstandings. The theme of your paper is vague or too simplistic. You do not put reasonable effort to support your claims. Usually, laziness, haste, or the absence of thought is the culprit here. Besides, your writing is marred by numerous small errors, or larger issues of wordiness or disorganization, or both. Appendix II: The structure of a philosophy paper a) A proper title (a must have) b) Introductory remarks: after the title, there should be one or two paragraphs indicating the topic of the paper, the problems it plans to address, and the order of the main points to be made. c) The body of the paper: it may have appropriate divisions and subdivisions for a long paper if necessary for easy to follow. Each section should have a section title. d) Conclusion: a final brief (less than a page) section indicating how the issues you raise clarify the problems raised by the philosopher you are studying. e) References (primary sources and secondary sources): citations should adopt the following format or any other standard format consistently: For book: Major-Poetzl (1983), P. Foucault's Archaeology of Western Culture, New Haven: Yale University Press, For translation: Foucault, M. (1972), The Archaeology of Knowledge, trans. Sheridan Smith, New York: Harper and Row, For essay in book: Foucault, M. (1983), "Nietzsche, Freud, Marx," in Transforming the Hermeneutic Context: From Nietzsche to Nancy, ed. Gayle L. Ormiston and Alan D. Schrift, Albany: State University of New York Press, pp. 66-67. For journal article: Stempel, D. (1981), "Blake, Foucault, and the Classical Episteme," PMLA 96, pp. 389-402. (f) Use footnotes for comments or citations. You can also embed a citation within the text. Any citation of a work referred to in a footnote or embedded in text should list simply the author's last name, publication year, and page numbers, for example: Stempel (1981), p. 391. (g) Paper format: double space, 12 points Times New Roman fonts, 1 margins, page numbers