Course Number: PHE 610 Course Title: Ethics Term: Spring 2017

Course Number: PHE 610 Course Title: Ethics Term: Spring 2017 1. Course Description: INSTRUCTOR Dr. Francisco Romero Carrasquillo (a.k.a., Dr. Romero ) Email: fcarrasquillo@holyapostles.edu This course is an introduction to the main theories, concepts, principles, and problems of the philosophical science of ethics from an Aristotelian and Thomistic perspective. The first part of the course will consist in a critique of certain metaethical and normative ethical theories, such as moral relativism, logical positivism, emotivism, utilitarianism, Kantianism, etc. The second half of the course will consist in a textual study of the main writings of Aristotle and St. Thomas Aquinas on moral principles including a discussion of happiness, the natural law, human acts, objective right and wrong, the principle of double effect, the passions, and the virtues and vices. 2. Envisioned Learning Outcomes Students will demonstrate an understanding of the basic principles of ethics as well as the various ethical theories, how to refute inadequate moral theories, such as relativism, utilitarianism, etc., and will examine the thought and writings of Aristotle and St. Thomas Aquinas in order to uncover the truth concerning morality, for the purpose in ministry outreach to overcome the widespread confusion in the area of ethics in post-christian world culture and in Catholic thought and to be a voice in current tragic issues. 3. COURSE REQUIREMENTS Weekly Discussion Postings 60% Final Paper 40% A. IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER: The instructor of this course reserves the right to change the tentative schedule of topics, number and length of examinations, point distribution, course requirements, and percentages required for letter grades in order to better facilitate the learning process. 1

B. Methodology for All Writing Assignments: The purpose of all of our writing assignments is to engage in serious scholarly argumentation. Your grade in all the writing assignments will depend on whether your posts reflect this. Concretely, your goal in each assignment is not simply to make claims, but to prove/disprove them. You are not merely going to summarize Aristotle, St. Thomas, etc., or merely to comment on how wonderful they are. You are to engage in philosophical debate, making convincing arguments for or against a given philosophical/ethical position. Your style should be argumentative and philosophical: you are giving arguments for or against any given moral/ethical or philosophical claim. If you would like, you can do this very elegantly by presenting your arguments with distinct premises and conclusions, as far as possible. Though by no means mandatory, one suggestion is for you to take your readings, especially St. Thomas Aquinas as your model (see his Summa theologiae) in using the scholastic method. Overall, the assigned readings will give you plenty of examples of formal syllogistic (i.e., premise-by-premise) argumentation. This is highly encouraged as it is an excellent way of expressing philosophical or theological ideas and arguments. However, this is just a preference, not a strict requirement; so long as you are giving recognizable arguments which are identifiable in some way or another, it s fine. Also, the arguments should be philosophical, i.e., should avoid using theological premises, or premises taken from Divine Revelation. There is no problem with simply quoting religious sources (e.g., the Summa, St. Augustine, the Catechism, a given encyclical, etc.), since these sources do contain philosophical material, but your argument cannot depend on them as authorities (i.e., you should not use them as proof texts ), because then you would be doing theology and not philosophy. Rather you must utilize premises that can be demonstrated from reason, independently of divine revelation. The fact that ethics is a philosophical discipline means, among other things, that its arguments should be demonstrable independently of revelation. Note that all of the above applies to both the weekly discussion posts/responses and to the term paper. C. Weekly Discussion Board Assignments: Every week during the semester your discussion post assignment will consist of a minimum of three total posts/interactions: a main post, plus two responses to other posts. That is, you must write at least one post that answers one of the discussion prompts listed on that week s discussion board, and later post at least two responses to the main posts of other classmates. The main post will be due on Thursday of each week; your first response (second post) will be due on Saturday of that same week; and your last response/post will be due on Monday of the following week. We will follow this schedule each week of the semester. 1. Main Post: Due on Thursday of each week by 11:59pm (Eastern Time Zone), your main posts will seek to initiate a discussion by answering directly one of the discussion prompts given that week in the discussion board. Your answer should be based on the readings for that week and you should include at least one or two specific references to the readings in each of your posts (cite specific titles, page nos. etc.). As you go through the readings you should look for points that are not clear and which you are curious about, or look for aporiae (philosophical puzzles, apparent contradictions, antinomies, etc.) so you can raise these issues in your post. This should provide good material for your classmates to write good responses to your post; their doing the same will make it easier for you to respond to their posts later in the week. 2. First Response: By Saturday of each week at 11:59pm you should post a response to one of your classmates main post. Do a critical reading of their posts, and reflect this in your response. Look for points where you disagree, or are not sure you agree, or where they may have misspoken (even if they are minor points), and write about that. Offer arguments to the contrary or challenge them to prove their claims. Of course, do it respectfully, and don t be bitter about it, 2

but do it in an intellectually challenging way. Concretely, this means also that you should refrain from pointless laudatory posts: a post where you simply say good job to your classmate and say that his thoughts resonate with you do not count as fulfilling the weekly assignment. 3. Second Response: By Monday of the following week at 11:59pm you should go back to the discussion board for the week that just ended and look for another post to respond to. It does not matter what you respond to: you could respond to another classmate s response to your original post, or to another classmate s response to someone else s original post, or a response to another classmate s original post, or even to one of your posts. All discussion boards will remain open throughout the semester so that you can always go back and continue old conversations. This is important, since what you learn later in the course can shed significant light on previous discussions. C. Final Paper: For your paper assignment you must write on any theory or principle discussed in the course. As with your weekly discussion assignments, I would like your style to be argumentative. For the methodology to be used, it will be the same as that used for discussion posts (see section B. Methodology for All Writing Assignments for details). This means concretely that the paper is supposed to be both philosophical (not theological) and argumentative. As far as the range of topics, I will give you plenty of freedom as to what you want to write on, so long as you stay within the scope of the course, which is the realm of ethical theory. So I will allow for people to write on ethical theories or principles that we have not explicitly discussed it in the course, but they still have to be ethical theories or principles, not applied ethical issues. That is to say, keep in mind that this course is not an applied ethics course (a course focusing on concrete ethical issues such as abortion, contraception, homosexual rights, just war, capitalism, etc.), but one that focuses on ethical theories such as relativism, utilitarianism, eudaimonism, etc., and principles, such as the natural law, virtues, etc. Accordingly, your paper should address an ethical theory or principle, and not an issue in applied ethics. In your paper you may briefly illustrate a theory or principle by making a brief reference to an applied issue (as, for instance, you could illustrate relativism by explaining how a relativist would view an issue such as abortion). But the bulk of the paper should focus on the theory/principle, arguing for or against it. As long as you address an ethical theory or principle, you may write an entirely "historical" or textual (i.e., exegetical) paper, where you engage the arguments that a given author (e.g., Aristotle, St. Thomas, etc.) offers on that given topic. For example, your paper could be on St. Thomas argument(s) for what human happiness consists in, on Aristotle s explanation of the distinction between justice, temperance, and fortitude, or even on some other author s arguments for his ethical theory. In other words, you don t need to have your own ethical theory to write a paper; you can grapple argumentatively with the ideas of another author, as you are going to be doing with the discussion assignments. But keep in mind that even in an historical/textual/exegetical paper you must in some way assess the author that you expound, so as you present the author's view you could give your thoughts on his approach, raise issues or questions on the basis of the text, etc. You don t merely report what the author states, but you give arguments for or against what they say. You can do this all the while keeping an emphasis on the author s texts themselves. Finally, originality is of crucial importance for your paper grade. It is imperative that you do not submit an old paper that you have used for another course, or paraphrase, or simply copy or cut/paste information from another source (e.g., from a website) as a paper. Carefully relate your topic to specific ideas discussed in the course and it must be evident to the professor that it is your original piece of writing intended solely for this course, and not a rehashed paper or plagiarized material. Be honest about what you are doing: cite your sources (see academic honesty policy below). 3

4. Course Schedule PART 1: INADEQUATE ETHICAL THEORIES Week 1: Introduction and Logic Crash Course Oesterle, Ethics, The Introduction to Moral Science, Ch. 1: Science and the Method of Ethics. Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, Book 1, Chs. 1-3. Logic PowerPoint. Watch video: Peter Kreeft on Moral Relativism. "Ethics," in New Catholic Encyclopedia, Supplement 2012-13: Ethics and Philosophy. You will have to access the Holy Apostles Library Online Resource & E-Reference Books and use your barcode to download and read the article. Week 2: Moral Relativism Feldman, Introductory Ethics, Ch. 11: Relativism. PowerPoint on Relativism. Watch video: Peter Kreeft on Moral Relativism. "Relativism," "Moral Relativism," and "Cultural Relativism," in New Catholic Encyclopedia, Supplement 2012-13: Ethics and Philosophy. You will have to access the Holy Apostles Library Online Resource & E-Reference Books and use your barcode to download and read the article. Week 3: Twentieth-Century Metaethics: Positivism, Emotivism, Prescriptivism Feldman, Introductory Ethics, Ch. 14-15: Emotivism and Prescriptivism. PowerPoint on Twentieth-Century Metaethics. "Logical Positivism," "Verifiability and Verificationism," "Emotivism," and "Prescriptivism," in New Catholic Encyclopedia, Supplement 2012-13: Ethics and Philosophy. You will have to access the Holy Apostles Library Online Resource & E- Reference Books and use your barcode to download and read the article. Watch videos on Logical Positivism and Emotivism. 4

Week 4: Naturalism and Non-Naturalism Francisco J. Romero Carrasquillo, "Ethical Objectivism," and "Ethical Naturalism," in New Catholic Encyclopedia, Supplement 2012-13: Ethics and Philosophy. You will have to access the Holy Apostles Library Online Resource & E-Reference Books and use your barcode to download and read the article. Feldman, Introductory Ethics, Chs. 12-13 (on Naturalism and Non-Naturalism). Watch video on Moore's "Open Question Argument." Week 5: Kant s Ethics Francisco J. Romero Carrasquillo, et al., "Ethical Formalism," in New Catholic Encyclopedia, Supplement 2012-13: Ethics and Philosophy. You will have to access the Holy Apostles Library Online Resource & E-Reference Books and use your barcode to download and read the article. Feldman, Introductory Ethics, Ch. 7 (Kant I). PowerPoint on Kant. Watch video on Kant s Ethics. Francisco J. Romero Carrasquillo, et al., "Duty and Duty-Based Ethics (Deontologism)," in New Catholic Encyclopedia, Supplement 2012-13: Ethics and Philosophy. You will have to access the Holy Apostles Library Online Resource & E-Reference Books and use your barcode to download and read the article. Feldman, Introductory Ethics, Ch. 8 (Kant II). Week 6: Utilitarianism Feldman, Introductory Ethics, Ch. 2-4 (on Act Utilitarianism). PowerPoint on Utilitarianism. Watch video on Utilitarianism. "Utilitarianism," in New Catholic Encyclopedia, Supplement 2012-13: Ethics and Philosophy. You will have to access the Holy Apostles Library Online Resource & E- Reference Books and use your barcode to download and read the article. 5

PART 2: Eudaemonism (Aristotelian-Thomistic Ethics) Week 7: Happiness St. Thomas Aquinas, Commentary on Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics, Book I, Lesson 1, nos. 1-6 only. Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, Book I. St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa theologiae, Ia-IIae, qq. 1-5, main responses only (you don t have to read the objections/replies). Oesterle, Ethics, The Introduction to Moral Science, Ch. 2-3. Week 8: Human Acts in General Francisco J. Romero Carrasquillo, "Ethical Voluntarism," in New Catholic Encyclopedia, Supplement 2012-13: Ethics and Philosophy. You will have to access the Holy Apostles Library Online Resource & E-Reference Books and use your barcode to download and read the article. PowerPoint on Aquinas' "Treatise on Human Acts." St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa theologiae, Ia-IIae, qq. 6-17, main responses only. Oesterle, Ethics, The Introduction to Moral Science, Ch. 5-6. Week 9: Human Acts Considered Morally PowerPoint on "Human Acts Considered Morally." St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa theologiae, Ia-IIae, qq. 18-21, main responses only. Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics, Book III, chs. 1-5. Oesterle, Ethics, The Introduction to Moral Science, Ch. 7. Week 10: Virtues I PowerPoint on "Human Nature and Human Virtues." Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics, Bk. 2; Bk. 3, chs. 6-12; Bk. 4. Oesterle, Ethics, The Introduction to Moral Science, Ch. 4, 8. 6

Week 11: Virtues II Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics, Bks. 5-7. Oesterle, Ethics, The Introduction to Moral Science, Ch. 9-10. Weeks 12: The Natural Law PowerPoint on "The Natural Law." St. Thomas, Summa theologiae, Ia-IIae, q. 90-94, main responses only. Oesterle, Ethics, The Introduction to Moral Science, Ch. 11. Week 13: Continence / Friendship Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics, Bks. 8-9. Oesterle, Ethics, The Introduction to Moral Science, Ch. 12-13. Week 14: Happiness, Revisited Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics, Bks. 10. St. Thomas, Summa theologiae, IIa-IIae, q. 179-183, main responses only. Oesterle, Ethics, The Introduction to Moral Science, Ch. 14. Weeks 15: Final Papers Attach your papers on the discussion board by Thursday. Read and comment on at least one other student s paper by Saturday. 5. READINGS: All texts are available electronically and be provided by the instructor via Populi, unless otherwise stated. Although the recommended readings are not strictly required, students are strongly encouraged to do them, as they are likely to solidify quite significantly their understanding of the material. 7

Feldman, Fred. Introductory Ethics. An introduction to ethics written by an analytical philosopher (non-catholic). Whereas it has many shortcomings for an introductory ethics textbook (e.g., it does not present natural law or virtue ethics, does not defend any view as being true), it nonetheless has strong merits as a systematic, logical refutation of many contemporary moral errors: utilitarianism, relativism, ethical egoism, Kantian ethics, etc. Familiarity with the method of analytical philosophy is crucial for graduate students, as it is quite prevalent in both secular and Catholic contemporary English-language philosophy. Oesterle, John A. Ethics: The Introduction to Moral Science. A traditional manual of philosophical ethics written in the middle of the 20 th century for college students; it is exceptional in that it follows the structure and text of the Nicomachean Ethics as its guiding principles. Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics. The classic text on the science of ethics, it serves as the backbone of our course. Although it is by no means comprehensive, it is the main source of classical eudaemonist ethics, as it delves into the topics of happiness, virtue, and friendship. St. Thomas Aquinas, Commentary on the Nicomachean Ethics. Aristotle s most excellent interpreter, St. Thomas combines his profound understanding of philosophy with the genius of Christian wisdom. His commentary is a detailed analysis of the work; it is valuable not only for its line-by-line commentary, but also for its meticulous analysis of the structure of the work. St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae. The classic summary of theology by the Angelic Doctor; the Second Part (Prima Secundae and Secunda Secundae) contains an exquisite summary of Catholic systematic moral theology. Although not a work of philosophy strictly speaking, it contains theological discussions that employ a good amount of philosophical reasoning, and hence is useful for philosophy courses. Apart from his Commentary on the Nicomachean Ethics, St. Thomas never wrote an ethics textbook, so this is the closest thing we have to an ethics textbook written by him. Students are asked to keep in mind the theological nature of this work, as well as the distinction between ethics and moral theology, as they read this masterpiece of moral theology. New Catholic Encyclopedia, Supplement 2012-13: Ethics and Philosophy. A quick, reliable reference for a wide variety of philosophical/ethical topics, seen from a Catholic scholarly perspective. It is an efficient way to survey a vast field, with its multifaceted issues and complex jargon. Its advantage over the old Catholic Encyclopedia (1914) is that it is updated and takes into account the developments that took place in philosophy in the 20 th century. Although shot through with error, these developments are nonetheless quite significant for the way we do philosophy today. As a graduate student you don t only have to master the philosophical tradition (Aristotle, Aquinas, the Magisterium, etc.) but also be conversant in contemporary philosophical discussion, and this text, along with Feldman s, can be very helpful. This text is not available directly through Populi: you will have to access the Holy Apostles Library Online Resource & E-Reference Books and use your barcode to download it and read it. 6. EVALUATION All assignments for this course require research and composition skills. Students who have difficulty with research and composition are encouraged to pursue assistance with the Online Writing Lab (available at http://www.holyapostles.edu/owl). 8

GRADING SCALE: A 94-100; A- 90-93; B+ 87-89; B 84-86; B- 80-83; C+ 77-79; C 74-76; C- 70-73 D 60-69; F 59 and below 8. DISABILITIES ACCOMMODATIONS POLICY Holy Apostles College & Seminary is committed to the goal of achieving equal educational opportunities and full participation in higher education for persons with disabilities who qualify for admission to the College. Students enrolled in online courses who have documented disabilities requiring special accommodations should contact Bob Mish, the Director of Online Student Affairs, at rmish@holyapostles.edu or 860-632-3015. In all cases, reasonable accommodations will be made to ensure that all students with disabilities have access to course materials in a mode in which they can receive them. Students who have technological limitations (e.g., slow Internet connection speeds in convents) are asked to notify their instructors the first week of class for alternative means of delivery. 9. ACADEMIC HONESTY POLICY Students at Holy Apostles College & Seminary are expected to practice academic honesty. Avoiding Plagiarism In its broadest sense, plagiarism is using someone else's work or ideas, presented or claimed as your own. At this stage in your academic career, you should be fully conscious of what it means to plagiarize. This is an inherently unethical activity because it entails the uncredited use of someone else's expression of ideas for another's personal advancement; that is, it entails the use of a person merely as a means to another person s ends. Students, where applicable: Should identify the title, author, page number/webpage address, and publication date of works when directly quoting small portions of texts, articles, interviews, or websites. Students should not copy more than two paragraphs from any source as a major component of papers or projects. Should appropriately identify the source of information when paraphrasing (restating) ideas from texts, interviews, articles, or websites. Should follow the Holy Apostles College & Seminary Stylesheet (available on the Online Writing Lab s website at http://www.holyapostles.edu/owl/resources). Consequences of Academic Dishonesty: At HACS academic honesty is taken very seriously. Students participating in academic dishonesty may be removed from the course and from the program. 10. ATTENDANCE POLICY Even though you are not required to be logged in at any precise time or day, you are expected to login several times during each week. Because this class is being taught entirely in a technologymediated forum, it is important to actively participate each week in the course. In a traditional classroom setting for a 3-credit course, students would be required, per the federal standards, to be in class three 50-minute sessions (or 2.5 hours a week) and prepare for class discussions six 50- minute sessions (or 5 hours) a week. Expect to devote at least nine 50-minute sessions (or 7.5 quality hours) a week to this course. A failure on the student s part to actively participate fully in weekly discussions will result in a significant reduction of the final grade. 9

11. INCOMPLETE POLICY An Incomplete is a temporary grade assigned at the discretion of the faculty member. It is typically allowed in situations in which the student has satisfactorily completed major components of the course and has the ability to finish the remaining work without re-enrolling, but has encountered extenuating circumstances, such as illness, that prevent his or her doing so prior to the last day of class. To request an incomplete, distance-learning students must first download a copy of the Incomplete Request Form. This document is located within the Shared folder of the Files tab in Populi. Secondly, students must fill in any necessary information directly within the PDF document. Lastly, students must send their form to their professor via email for approval. Approval should be understood as the professor responding to the student s email in favor of granting the Incomplete status of the student. Students receiving an Incomplete must submit the missing course work by the end of the sixth week following the semester in which they were enrolled. An incomplete grade (I) automatically turns into the grade of F if the course work is not completed. Students who have completed little or no work are ineligible for an incomplete. Students who feel they are in danger of failing the course due to an inability to complete course assignments should withdraw from the course. A W (Withdrawal) will appear on the student s permanent record for any course dropped after the end of the first week of a semester to the end of the third week. A WF (Withdrawal/Fail) will appear on the student s permanent record for any course dropped after the end of the third week of a semester and on or before the Friday before the last week of the semester. 12. ABOUT YOUR PROFESSOR Francisco Romero Carrasquillo, PhD Dr. Francisco Romero was born and raised in Puerto Rico. He holds a PhD in medieval philosophy from Marquette University and an M.A. in Theology and Christian Ministry from Franciscan University of Steubenville. He is a faculty member at Universidad Panamericana, a corporate work of Opus Dei in Mexico, where he has served as Chair of Humanities and is currently Associate Research Professor of Philosophy. He has also taught philosophy, Latin, and religious studies at institutions such as Marquette University, St. Francis de Sales Seminary, Portland State University, and Oregon State University. As a scholar, he specializes in the philosophy of religion, philosophical ethics, and in Thomas Aquinas' Arabic philosophical sources. His academic research has appeared in numerous scholarly journals and international publications including The Thomist, American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly, Latin Mass Magazine, and The New Catholic Encyclopedia. He is the author of the Ite ad Thomam blog, and the founder and president of Ite ad Thomam Books and Media. He lives in Lincoln, Nebraska with his wife and eight children. For Dr. Romero s CV, publications, and other information and materials, visit his Academia.edu Page: https://up-mx.academia.edu/franciscoromerocarrasquillo 10