Philosophy of Love (Spring 2009)
In this course, we will explore several philosophical problems arising from reflection on romantic love. The class will examine problems in general value theory, including: the nature of love, the relationship between value and desire, the rationality of emotion, and the authenticity of desire. We will begin by examining attempts to distinguishing between friendship and romantic love. Then we will evaluate several leading theories of romantic love, paying particular attention to question of whether love is a response to the recognition of value, or if we bestow value through love. Here, we will ask about the relationship between value, belief, and desire. In regards to the nature of love, we will also briefly study theories of the emotions. We will then turn to one of the most important problems in the love literature: Can we rationally justify our love for another? In the final section of the course, we will attempt to account for the prima facie difference between love earned though potions and ordinary love. This will require an account of the authenticity of desire. We will evaluate some of the leading contenders. The readings will include dozens of articles from
contemporary philosophers such as Annette Baier, Harry Frankfurt, Robert
Nozick, Martha Nussbaum, Irving Singer, Alan Soble, Robert Solomon, Michael
Smith, and others. In addition, we will
read selections from Aristotle, Montaigne, Schopenhauer, and Sartre, as well as
Plato's "Symposium" and "Phaedrus". We will also be reading a few literature
works, including poems from Sappho, Yeats, and Berryman, and an excerpt from Don Quixote. We will also read Shakespeare's "A
Midsummer Night's Dream." The Good Life (Spring 2009)This class will focus on one of the most fundamental questions in moral philosophy: What makes a life good for the one who lives it? To answer this question is to provide a theory of well-being. We will study four different types of answers: Hedonism (pleasure), Preferentism (desire-satisfaction), Perfectionism (perfecting human nature), and Objective List theories. The readings will come from a mix of classical and contemporary sources. We'll be thinking about experience machines, deceived business men, porky pig, sadistic killers of children, ascetic hermits, evil universes, grass counters, strangers on trains, and drug addicts. Along the way we explore several related issues. Is there anything common to the experiences that we call "pleasures"? Can you can be harmed after your death? Can one have a good but meaningless life? What is the meaning of life?(Spring 2009 Course Page) Philosophy of Film Often, when one hears “philosophy of film,” one imagines something that would be better called philosophy in (or through) film. On this model, one picks a handful of philosophical films and then discusses whatever philosophical issues they happen to explore. Although this may improve one's understanding of those particular films, such courses are typically too diffuse and do little to increase our understanding of philosophy. As such, we won't be doing philosophy in film; instead, this course focuses on as a set of philosophical problems having to do with the nature of film and our experiences of it. We will address questions such as: Can movies be art? What is film? What distinguishes narrative fiction films from documentaries? Do films have narrators? How do films move us? Do films have authors whose artistic intentions matter? Can ethical flaws detract from the aesthetic value of a film? Can films instruct or corrupt us morally? Can films “do philosophy”? In other words, is “philosophy in film” possible? Students will gain a clear understanding of the major problems in the philosophy of film. Focusing on these problems is the most effective way to sharpen the critical vocabulary used in film theory and criticism. Most of the reading will come from the collection Philosophy of Film and Motion Pictures (eds. Noel Carroll and Jinhee Choi) and a course packet. We will read articles from Noel Carroll, Stanley Cavell, Greggory Currie, Arthur Danto, Mary Devereaux, Berys Gaut, Lester Hunt, Deborah Knight, Susanne Langer, Paisley Livingston, Domic McIver Lopes, Roger Scruton, Aaron Smuts, Francis Sparshott, George Wilson, Kendall Walton, Thomas Wartenberg, and more.
The Philosophy of Death Epicurus argued that we should not fear death, since it could not cause us harm: where death is, we are not; where we are, death is not. Although this argument may seem patently absurd, it and similar arguments have been difficult to refute conclusively. In this course we will try to answer the question: Is death an evil? In order to answer this question we will first need to know what “death” is. We will explore several major puzzles surrounding the value and nature of death. We will also examine the inverse of the harm question: would immortality be desirable? Although it seems obvious that we would like to live forever, philosophers have presented a few serious problems that cast doubt on the value of an immortal life. Independent of its harmfulness, we will consider reasons to think that death might actually add value to our lives.
Classical Film Theory and Philosophy This course will survey classical film theory from the silent era to the late 1960's. We will examine how some influential theorists have reflected on the nature and function of cinema. The course will explore the answers each thinker offers to three questions that preoccupied most of the classical film theorists: (1) What are the basic properties of cinema? (2)What are the potential/actual effects of cinema on spectators? And (3) What are the best artistic uses of cinema? The ontological, psychological, and aesthetic issues raised by the classical theorists are central to contemporary philosophy of film. As such, students will not only gain an understanding of some of the best thinking on the subject, they will be exposed to the origins of the current debates. We will read many of the most important primary sources by figures such as: Arnheim (Film as Art), Bazin (What is Cinema? Vols. I and II) , Vertov (essays), Eisenstein (Film Form and Film Sense), Burch (Theory of Film Practice), and Perkins (Film as Film). We will also look at some secondary literature by David Bordwell, Noel Carroll, Aaron Smuts, and others. Along the way, we will be viewing many of the major films discussed in the literature: The Gold Rush (Chaplin, 1925), Bicycle Thieves (De Sica, 1947), Rules of the Game (Renoir, 1939), Man with a Movie Camera (Vertov, 1929), The Battleship Potemkin (Eisenstein, 1925), October (Eisenstein, 1925), Ivan the Terrible (Eisenstein, 1945), Play Time (Tati, 1967), and Carmen Jones (Preminger, 1954).
New Media Theory What is “new media?” Can it be distinguished from “old media?” If so, one might think that the distinguishing characteristic will likely be interactivity. Our exploration of new media theory will begin with an assessment of this controversial claim. In this course we will explore the nature, effects, and forms of new media. We will attempt to define interactivity and to classify the various forms of narrative that have arisen in new media. Along the way, we will pay special attention to video games, exploring questions such as: What are video games? Do video games have rules? Can video games be art? We will be reading from a variety of authors including: Henry Jenkins, Aaron Smuts, Jonathan Frome. Marie-Laure Ryan, Janet Murray, Mark Wolf, Bernard Perron, Katie Salen, Eric Zimmerman, Steven Poole, Lev Manovich and others.
Art and Morality Is The Birth of a Nation less aesthetically valuable because of its despicable racist content, or is there “no such thing as a moral or immoral book,” as Oscar Wilde claims? This course focuses on the relationship between moral and aesthetic value. We will engage almost exclusively with the current literature around what is called “moralism about art”--the position that moral flaws can be detrimental to the aesthetic value of a work of art—and its antithesis, “immoralism”--the position that moral flaws can be aesthetic virtues. In order to assess these positions, we will need to understand the ways in which artworks might be morally flawed. Entering this debate also forces us to explore some of the difficult literature on the nature of aesthetic value and aesthetic properties. Student swill gain an understanding of some of the most difficult and important issues in the current philosophy of art. The course attempts a thorough coverage of the contemporary literature in the art and morality debate. We will read articles from Ted Cohen, Noel Carroll, Mary Devereaux, George Dickie, Berys Gaut, Ronald de Sousa, Matthew Kieran, Peter Railton, Aaron Smuts, Daniel Jacobson, Justin D'Arms, James Anderson, Jeffery Dean, and others.
This class will explore the important issues raised by contemporary transgressive art. For instance, we will consider art works from the “Sensation Show,” which featured Marcus Harvey's portrait of a child murder composed of hundreds of children's hand prints and Chris Ofili's elephant dung-smeared picture “The Holy Virgin Mary”. We will also discuss the controversy surrounding works from the NEA Four (Karen Finley, Tim Miller, John Fleck, and Holly Hughes). In addition, the class will explore issues regarding public art, considering sculptures such as Serra's “Tilted Arc.” The primary questions we will address are these: Is government funding of the arts justified? Should someone's tax dollars be used to support art when the art conflicts with their values? Should any art be censored? When is art morally wrong? Can art cause harm? Can moral flaws with works of art contribute positively to their aesthetic value?
Humor and Comedy This class explores the major theories of humor and comedy from antiquity to the present. Our focus will be more on theories of humor than theories of comedy. We will examine the basis for criticisms of racist and sexist humor as well as the role of humor in the avant-garde and conceptual art. We will also address the issue of whether ethical flaws in attempts at humor can detract from or enhance amusement. The course will explore these questions: What is humor? What makes something funny? Is humor an emotion? Is humor and aesthetic property? What is comedy? Are there comic plot structures? Do moral flaws make attempts at humor more amusing? We will be reading from a variety of philosophers, including: Plato, Aristotle, Epictetus, Descartes, Hobbes, Hutcheson, Kant, Schopenhauer, Kierkegaard, and Bergson. We will also engage with the current literature. We will read recent articles from John Morreall, Noel Carroll, Ronald deSousa, Aaron Smuts, Daniel Jacobson, Robert C. Roberts, Robert Solomon and others.
Mass Art Is popular art essentially flawed? Does it aim at the lowest common denominator? Is there something politically liberating about mechanically reproduced art? What is mass art? How does mass art engage the emotions? On what grounds can we criticize popular art? How might mass art instruct and corrupt us morally? These are some of the questions this class will explore. The goal of this class is to critically evaluate the fundamental assumptions and central arguments that set the stage for much of the current critical work in the humanities. Students will develop a sophisticated understanding of the key positions in the philosophy of mass art. Students will also gain an understanding of several major issues in the philosophy of art. There are two required texts for this class: (1) Noel Carroll, A Philosophy of Mass Art (Oxford, 1998), which will structure the course. It will serve as both a primary source and as a comprehensive secondary source. (2) The second text is the course packet. The majority of the readings will come from articles in the packet. We will be reading figures such as: Adorno, Dwight MacDonald, Greenberg, Collingwood, Horkenheimer, Benjamin, McLuhan, David Novitz, Susan Feagin, Marx, Engels, Plato, and Althusser.
Analytic Metaethics Metaethics is the philosophy of ethics. This course will not look at any applied ethical issues, such as abortion or capital punishment. Nor will we be explore any theories about what makes an action wrong or right. Instead, we will explore questions such as: Do ethical claims have cognitive content, that is, do they state facts or is our moral discourse the mere expression of approval or disapproval? If statements such as “torturing the weak for sport is wrong” make factually evaluable claims, are any of these claims true, or are we in nearly constant error? Must moral judgments come with motivation to “do the right thing”? Students will become conversant with the serious alternatives to reflexive moral relativism. The goal of the course is to introduce students to the major positions in one of the most active and important areas of contemporary analytic philosophy. We will be reading from the new collection by Shafer-Landau and Cuneo called Foundations of Ethics supplemented by additional articles and a secondary source, such as Miller's introduction or Darwall's Philosophical Ethics.
Continental and Analytic Metaethics Metaethics is the philosophy of ethics. This course will not look at any applied ethical issues, such as abortion or capital punishment. Nor will we be explore any theories about what makes an action wrong or right. Instead, we will be asking questions about the nature and value of ethics. The analytic and continental traditions have developed along radically different paths. Authors in the analytic tradition have largely been focused on metaphysical and epistemic foundations of our ethical discourse, whereas authors in the continental tradition have, by and large, focused on the value of our ethical practice for human flourishing. This course will cover some of the major positions in the analytic literature and then move onto the criticism of morality offered by Nietzsche, Marx, Freud, and Foucault.
Meta-criticism or the Philosophy of Art Criticism In this course we will be reading contemporary criticism of gallery shows, music performances, plays, films, and performance art in the metropolitan area (which students will be required to attend). We will be using contemporary criticism as a way to expose the problems of meta-criticism. These issues include: What is the function of interpretation? Are the artist's intentions relevant to the meaning of a work of art? How does one assess the value of art? Can disputes between critics be resolved? Are some aesthetic judgments better than others? What attributes are most desirable in a judge of art? Are moral and political considerations relevant to the evaluation of art? We will be doing philosophy out of the activities of the artworld. (Note: As such, this class is only possible in New York and a few other cities, but in other contexts it could structure a smaller part of a more general course in aesthetics.)
This course explores the major theories of the nature and function of narration. In particular we will be concerned with film narration. We will study in depth two main traditions in the theory of narrative, the structuralist and the cognitive/mentalistic, before turning to three key problem areas manifested in cinema: narrative worlds, narrative structure, and narration. One key question we will consider is whether films have narrators. The majority of the readings will come from Seymor Chatman, Aristotle, and David Bordwell. We will read a variety of other articles and excerpts from theorists such as: Murray Smith, Richard Egri, Lea Jacobs, Noel Carroll, Paisley Livingston, and Kristin Thompson. Throughout the course will will be discussing pertinent films.
The Philosophy of Horror What is horror? How is it able to frighten and disgust? Why do we seek out horror if it horrifies? These three questions will structure the course. We will begin by exploring (1) the nature of the genre. The course will examine several competing accounts of the genre and the very nature of genres. (2) The second topic concerns the ability of horror to solicit emotional responses from audiences. We will ask about both what makes horror in particular effective, and about how it is that fiction can arouse emotions when audiences do not believe that the characters and events are real. This more general problem is known as the “Paradox of Fiction,” which we will explore in depth. (3) The third topic of the course is known as the “Paradox of Horror”, which is closely related to the paradox of tragedy. Typically emotions such as fear and disgust are aversive; that is, people avoid situations that cause negative emotions. However, with horror and other genres of painful art, we seem to seek out negative emotions. This course will explore some of the best answers that have been offered to this puzzle. The primary text for this course is Noel Carroll's The Philosophy of Horror. We will also be reading a variety of essays on genre theory, the paradox of fiction, belief, emotion, and the paradox of tragedy. Authors include: Aristotle, Noel Carroll, Angela Curran, David Hume, Cynthia Freeland, Schopenhauer, Daniel Shaw, Steven Schneider, Robert Solomon, Aaron Smuts, Robert Yanal, and others.
|