Ethics (PHIL 103)
Study Helps & Philosophy Links
Spring 2014
MWF 9:10-10:10
John R. Howard Hall 115
Email: fritzman@lclark.edu
Class email: 14sp-phil-103-01@lclark.edu
Phone: 503-768-7477
Office: Howard 223
Hours: MWF 10:30-12:00, MW 3:30-4:30, and by appointment
COURSE DESCRIPTION
Oscar Wilde: "Modern morality consists in accepting the standards of one's age. I consider that for any man of culture to accept the standards of his age is a form of the grossest immorality."
This is an introductory course in normative ethical theory. There is one required text in this course:
Ethical Theory: An Anthology, Second Edition,
edited by Russ Shafer-Landau.
Wiley-Blackwell, 2013
Paperback
ISBN-10: 0470671602
ISBN-13: 978-0470671603
Retail: $69.95
New: Starting at $36.66
Used: Starting at $34.87
Ethical Theory is available through the College Bookstore, Amazon.com, or Barnes & Noble.
In preparation for each class meeting, you should have read the assigned material. You should arrive in class with prepared questions or comments about something in the assigned reading.
In addition to learning about normative ethical theory, a major goal of this course is to cultivate intellectual abilities which have general application. This course aims to provide the resources which will enable you to develop intellectual survival skills, question what passes as common knowledge and accepted wisdom, evaluate your own and others' positions, and formulate new ideas. Such skills consist in the ability to summarize the assigned material, and to write pieces in which ideas and arguments are articulated, criticized, defended. Such skills also involve developing the ability to think critically about the views of ourselves and others. Critical thinking consists in understanding several sides of a debate, and seeing both the advantages and limitations of an opinion. Learning to question your opinions is as crucial as arguing for them. If you only learn to give reasons for opinions already held, you merely are giving rationalizations for prejudices. You need to learn to think for yourself, developing, defending, and criticizing your beliefs.
In this connection, I am especially concerned that you develop the ability to discuss issues cogently and to write intelligent, reflective pieces in clear, grammatical English. It is important that you learn to think, in a disciplined way, about the books and issues they raise. Part of that discipline consists in being able to analyze, evaluate, and formulate arguments. This involves knowing how to identify basic assumptions, develop a line of reasoning, recognize the steps that lead to a conclusion, and determine whether an argument is sound. In this way, hopefully, you will develop intellectual curiosity and the competencies to reason logically, evaluate critically, communicate effectively, imagine creatively, and appreciate aesthetic and creative expressions of humanity.
You are encouraged to share your questions and observations with the rest of the class, and to engage critically with the material, myself, and each other. By participating in class discussions, you will encounter directly differing interpretations of the material, become aware of the history of these views, and be encouraged to develop your own critical perspectives. In interacting with the material and each other, you will acquire a knowledge and appreciation of self, society, human cultures, and the natural world. I intend that you discover what has been written and said concerning, in the words of Socrates, "the most important things" -- questions about human character and the conduct of life. Such skills will enable you to succeed in subsequent courses and in endeavors outside of the classroom. Those abilities also will contribute to your development as educated citizens in a democratic society.
Each student will write a precis on almost every reading assignment, complete various research exercises that teach research skills, and write and present in class one assessment on a specific reading assignment. In addition, you will write two argumentative research papers (which will include prospectuses, drafts, and mandatory rewrites). At the last class session, during finals week, you will give a class presentation about your paper.
The précis and research exercises will count for 20% of your final grade. The assessment will count for 19% of your final grade. The first argumentative research paper count for 19% of your final grade. The second argumentative research paper will count for 38% of your final grade. The presentation of the second argumentative paper will count for 4% of your final grade.
The grading scale is as follows:
A = 93%-100%
A- = 90%-92%
B+ = 86%-89%
B = 83% 85%
B- = 80%-82%
C+ = 76%-79%
C = 73%-75%
C- = 70%-72%
D+ = 66%-69%
D = 60%-65%
F = 0%-59%.
A précis will be due almost every class session. Each précis will be one typed page -- never longer -- double-spaced, with 1 inch margins on the right & left sides and the top & bottom. It must be at least 3/4 of a page in length. Use a 12-point Times or Times Roman font. There will be no spelling or grammatical errors in your précis. Your name will be typed in the upper right-hand corner. In each précis, you will summarize -- in your own words, without using any quotes -- the assigned reading's main claims, as well as the reasons which are given to support those claims. You will not include any opinion, evaluation, or commentary. At the bottom of each précis, or on the back, you will write one question that you have about the reading; this question must be typed, not handwritten. You will receive 1 point for each précis which meets all of the above requirements, and 3 points if the précis is excellent. I never will accept a late précis, but I will allow you to drop one.
An assessment should be approximately 1500 words, typed, double-spaced. Except for the length, the assessment should follow the same format requirement as the précis. You will sign up for a dates on which you will present your assessments. Except for the length, the assessment should follow the same format requirement as the précis (see the additional helps at the end of this syllabus). On the day you present, you will distribute copies to all of the persons in this class. This will require, of course, that you have enough copies made so that each member of the class has one. You first will read your assessment, and then you and I will serve as the main resource persons for fielding questions concerning the material. Since the class discussion will be centered around the assessment, it is crucial that you distribute the assessment the class session when you present it, and that you actually be in class to read your assessment. The primary purpose of the assessment is to summarize, consolidate, and explicate the central issues, main points, and key motifs of the assigned secondary literature in order to facilitate class discussion of the material. It is important that the assessment contextualize the reading by describing briefly both how the reading is a continuation and development of material which has come before, and how it contributes to the overall trajectory of the thinker's thought. It is crucial that you critically engage the reading. You might argue that a claim that the author makes is incorrect, for example, or that a criticism in the secondary literature is incorrect. Alternatively, you might argue that an interpretation advanced in the secondary literature is incorrect. The assessment should reflect an acquaintance with the requisite secondary literature. This means that you must incorporate at least three secondary sources you consulted while writing your assessment
Before the draft is due, you will submit a prospectus of this paper in which you: (1) indicate the topic and thesis of your paper, (2) fully describe the problem or issue to be treated, (3) outline your anticipated procedure and probable conclusion, and (4) include an annotated bibliography of works to be consulted (a minimum of three books or articles, with at least a paragraph discussing the relevance of each work to your project).
A student presenting an assessment will not submit a précis of that material too.
The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, the Philosopher's Index, the Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, and Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy will be useful.
The Chicago Manual of Style's Citation Quick Guide is online.
The argumentative research papers will be on the assigned reading material and the lectures. The final paper will focus on the reading material on which you did the assessment. Each paper should be approximately 1500 words, typed, double-spaced. Except for the length, the papers should follow the same formatrequirement as the precis. They must employ argumentation. You will choose your theses, but they must be based on the readings for this course. These papers may emphasize either a historical or theoretical interpretation. In either case, you should carefully state the problem you intend to treat, explain its significance, assess its possible solutions, propose an hypothesis, argue convincingly for that hypothesis, and eliminate the major (published or imagined) competing hypotheses.
You're welcome to consult the Writing Center, located on the main floor of Watzek Library. The Writing Center is available to help students with all aspects of the writing process, including brainstorming ideas, developing a coherent paper structure, crafting elegant sentences, evaluating support for an argument, and dealing with writer’s block. The Center’s director, John Holzwarth, is available for individual appointments all semester long, and peer tutors are available without an appointment most afternoons and evenings. Visit the Writing Center website for additional information and resources, or contact John at writing@lclark.edu.
Also useful is the Online Writing Lab (OWL) at Purdue University.
If you would find it useful to create concept maps, to help write your assessment or argumentative research papers, you can download the software to create them from IHMC Cmap Tools.
All work must be submitted when it is due. Late work -- précis, assessments, argumentative research papers -- will not be accepted and will receive no credit.
This class will be successful only if there is a high degree of participation and attendance, and so I want you in class participating. The final grade for the course will be lowered by a full-letter grade if you miss four class sessions, the final grade will be lowered by two full-letter grades if you miss five class sessions, and you will be withdrawn from the course if you miss six or more class sessions. I will not accept make-up work unless you can document the reason for your absence. Documenting the reason for your absence means providing a note from, for example, your doctor explaining why you were absent. Serious illnesses and emergencies will be dealt with on a case-by-case basis.
Throughout the course you are expected to read carefully the assigned material. It is impossible to do well in this course without reading and studying the books. You should spend a minimum of three hours preparing for each class session. I suggest that you read the assigned material at least twice and that you take notes on what you read. You are expected to attend all class sessions, come to class having read thoroughly the assigned material, and to contribute to the discussions.
Gorgias of Leontini maintained that "those who neglect philosophy and spend their time on ordinary studies are like the suitors who desired Penelope but slept with her maids." In philosophy, unlike ordinary studies, there are few right and wrong answers. There are better and worse arguments and ideas, however, usually in direct proportion to thoughtfulness and care. What is important is that you think for yourself, and that you develop and defend your own ideas. It would be an excellent idea to write drafts or outlines of your précis and papers, and to have a comrade read them to check on spelling, grammar, development of arguments, and so forth.
You are strongly encouraged to discuss the class material, your ideas, your puzzles and difficulties with each other. A word to the wise: Find a study partner to discuss things with outside of class. (To see why this is so effective for creativity and learning, read Malcolm Gladwell's article, Group Think: What Does Saturday Night Live Have in Common with German Philosophy?, The New Yorker, 2 December 2002).
There's a Bollwood tune for every occasion. Click here.
When it comes to finally writing your précis and essays, though, do your own writing. That is the only way you will get the full benefit of your own efforts. I will be happy to discuss ideas with you, read outlines and rough drafts, and so forth. That is partly why I keep office hours.
A final word to the wise. It is not difficult to do well in this class, but it also is easy to do badly. Let me talk about the bad stuff first. You will receive a major grade reduction -- or fail this course -- if you do not read the material, seldom participate in class discussions, do not write your précis or assessments, do not write the argumentative research papers, plagiarize, cheat, and so forth.
About plagiarizing and cheating. All students are expected to follow Lewis & Clark College's Academic Integrity Policy. Except for highly unusual circumstances, plagiarizers and cheaters will be given an "F" for the entire course (they will not be allowed to drop or withdraw from the course). I also will turn their cases over to the Honor Board; usually, I will recommend that disciplinary penalties be assessed in addition to failing grades. It is never in your interest to plagiarize or cheat!
Now for the good stuff. With a concerted effort you can do well in this class. To do well, you must participate in class discussions, read and study the assigned material, write the précis and assessment, write the argumentative research papers, be in class (almost) all of the time, etc. I do not grade on a curve, and so there is no good reason why you should not get an "A" for the course!
Course policy on disability accommodation. If you have a disability or learning difference that may impact your academic performance, you may request accommodations by submitting documentation to Student Support Services, located in Albany 206 (access@lclark.edu, 503-768-7156). They will notify me of the accommodations for which you are eligible.
COURSE SCHEDULE
Oscar Wilde: "The supreme vice is shallowness. Everything that is realised is right."
Week 1
Wednesday, 1/22:
Introduction to the course.
Read Malcolm Gladwell's article, Group Think.
Read Jim Pryor's essay, Guidelines on Reading Philosophy.
The Status of Morality
Pages 3-6
Friday, 1/24:
David Hume, "On the Influencing Motives of the Will" and "Moral Distinctions Not Derived from Reason," pages 7-15; précis.
Week 2
Discussion of (annotated) bibliography, footnotes, reasons for citations, proper quoting (block or in-line).
M, 1/27:
A. J. Ayer, "A Critique of Ethics," pages 16-21; précis.
Sign-up for Assessment.
Wednesday, 1/29:
J. L. Mackie, "The Subjectivity of Values," pages 22-30; précis.
Friday, 1/31:
Gilbert Harman, Ethics and Observation," pages 31-34; précis.
Research Exercise for Monday: Find one book and one article that will be relevant to your Assessment. Provide one block quote from the book and one in-line quote from the article. List the book and the article in proper formats for footnote and bibliography.
Week 3
Discussion of search procedures for articles and books.
Monday, 2/3:
Gilbert Harman, "Moral Relativism Defended," pages 35-43; précis.
Wednesday, 2/5:
Harry Gensler, "Cultural Relativism," pages 44-47; précis.
Friday, 2/7:
G. E. Moore, "The Subject Matter of Ethics," pages 48-53; précis.
Research Exercise for Monday: in proper bibliographical format, list three articles and two books that are relevant to your Assessment.
Saturday, 2/8:
Vasant Panchami dinner, 7:00 PM.
Vasant Panchami celebrates the birth of Saraswati,
the goddess of knowledge, music, and the arts. She
is also the consort of Brahma.
Week 4
Discussion on using the Arts & Humanities Citation Index and the Philosopher's Index.
Monday, 2/10:
Russ Shafer-Landau, "Ethics as Philosophy: A Defense of Ethical Nonnaturalism," pages 54-62; précis.
Wednesday, 2/12:
Michael Smith, "Realism," pages 63-67; précis.
Virtue Ethics
Pages 611-614
Friday, 2/14:
Aristotle, "The Nature of Virtue," pages 615-629; précis.
Research Exercise for Monday: In proper bibliographical format, list three new articles that you found through the Arts & Humanities Citation Index or the Philosopher's Index that are relevant to your Assessment.
Week 5
Discussion of annotated bibliography and reliability of sources.
Monday, 2/17:
Martha Nussbaum, "Non-Relative Virtues: An Aristotelian Approach," pages 631-644; précis.
Wednesday, 2/19:
Rosalind Hursthouse, "Normative Virtue Ethics," pages 645-652; précis.
Assessment: Patrick Jackson.
Friday, 2/21: Midsouth Philosophy Conference.
Week 6
Discussion of note taking and perusing for content.
Monday, 2/24:
Michael Slote, "Agent-Based Virtue Ethics," pages 653-663; précis.
PROSPECTUS OF FIRST ARGUMENTATIVE RESEARCH PAPER DUE.
Wednesday, 2/26:
Christine Swanton, "A Virtue Ethical Account of Right Action," pages 664-675; précis.
Friday, 2/28:
Julia Annas, "Being Virtuous and Doing the Right Thing," pages 676-685; précis.
Assessment: Patrick Blaylock.
Week 7
Deontology
Pages 479-484
Discussion of formulating a thesis: prospectus, outlines, drafts, revisions.
Monday, 3/3:
Immanuel Kant, "Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals," pages 485-498; précis.
DRAFT OF FIRST ARGUMENTATIVE RESEARCH PAPER DUE.
Wednesday, 3/5:
Christine Korsgaard, "Kant's Principle of Universal Law," pages 499-509; précis.
Assessment: Jacob Oram.
Friday, 3/7:
Onora O'Neill, "Kantian Approaches to Some Famine Problems," pages 510-520; précis.
Week 8
Discussion of articulating a thesis: arguments, objections, replies.
Monday, 3/10:
Robert Nozick, "The Rationality of Side Constraints," pages 521-523; précis.
Wednesday, 3/12:
Alan Gewirth, "The Golden Rule Rationalized," pages 524-535; précis.
Assessment: Spencer Lane.
Friday, 3/14:
Philippa Foot, "The Problem of Abortion and the Doctrine of Double Effect," pages 536-542; précis.
Week 9
Monday, 3/17:
FIRST ARGUMENTATIVE RESEARCH PAPER DUE.
Submit four items: (1) the final rewrite, (2) the draft on which I wrote comments, (3) the draft on which your peer evaluator wrote comments, and (4) the peer evaluation form.
Wednesday, 3/19:
Judith Jarvis Thomson, "Killing, Letting Die, and The Trolley Problem," pages 543-551; précis.
Assessment: Sam Franer.
Also read:
Can Bad Men Make Good Brains Do Bad Things?
Friday, 3/21: Sheldon Pollock Lecture at the University of Washington.
Week 10
Monday, 3/24: Spring Break.
Wednesday, 3/26: Spring Break.
Friday, 3/28: Spring Break.
Consequentialism
Pages 411-416
Week 11
Monday, 3/31:
John Stuart Mill, "Utilitarianism," pages 417-422; précis.
PROSPECTUS OF FINAL ARGUMENTATIVE RESEARCH PAPER DUE.
Wednesday, 4/2:
J. J. C. Smart, "Extreme and Restricted Utilitarianism," pages 423-427; précis.
Friday, 4/4:
Brad Hooker, "Rule Consequentialism," pages 428-440; précis.
Week 12
Monday, 4/7:
Peter Railton, "Alienation, Consequentialism, and the Demands of Morality," pages 441-457; précis.
Wednesday, 4/9:
R. M. Hare, "What is Wrong with Slavery," pages 458-565; précis.
Assessment: Spencer Gibson.
Friday, 4/11:
Peter Singer, "Famine, Affluence and Morality," pages 566-573; précis.
Assessment: Elijah Probst.
Week 13
Monday, 4/14:
John Harris, "The Survival Lottery," pages 574-578; précis.
DRAFT OF FINAL ARGUMENTATIVE RESEARCH PAPER DUE.
Wednesday, 4/16: American Philosophical Association Pacific Division.
Friday, 4/18: American Philosophical Association Pacific Division.
Feminist Ethics
Pages 687-691
Week 14
Monday, 4/21:
Nell Noddings, "An Ethics of Care," pages 698-712; précis.
Wednesday, 4/23:
Cheshire Calhoun, "Justice, Care, and Gender Bias," pages 713-720; précis.
Friday, 4/25:
Annette Baier, "The Need for More than Justice," pages 721-728; précis.
Week 15
Monday, 4/28:
Marilyn Frye, "Sexism," pages 729-734; précis.
Wednesday, 4/30:
Margaret Urban Walker, "Feminist Skepticism, Authority, and Transparency," pages 733-750; précis.
Assessment: Sophie Owens.
Week 16
Thursday, 5/8:
REWRITE OF FINAL ARGUMENTATIVE RESEARCH PAPER DUE AT 8:30 AM.
Submit four items: (1) the final rewrite, (2) the draft on which I wrote comments, (3) the draft on which your peer evaluator wrote comments, and (4) the peer evaluation form.
Presentation of paper.
Home
J. M. Fritzman
0615 SW Palatine Hill Road
Portland, OR 97219-7899
USA
503-768-7477