Professor: Dr. Anne Jeffrey
Email: ajeffrey@southalabama.edu
Office: Humanities 133
Office Hours: MW 9-10 am, 1:40-2:10 pm, or by appointment
A paradox is a puzzle that undermines how the world appears to us. This word comes from “παραδοξον” in Greek—παρα meaning “distinct from” and δοξον meaning “appearance” or “belief”. The paradox is generated by deriving an absurd or false conclusion from premises that seem true and logical inferences that seem valid.
In this course, we will investigate how paradoxes put forward by the earliest known Western philosophers shaped the thought of Plato and Aristotle, two of the most influential philosophers in Western philosophy to date.
We begin with the Eleatic philosophers Parmenides and Zeno of Elea. Parmenides is often called the father of modern metaphysics, and rightfully so, because he called for philosophers to consider the nature of reality apart from what we come to know by perceptual inquiry. The Pluralists, (Anaxagoras and Empedocles) and Atomists (Leucippus and Democritus) began developing theories that would solve a series of paradoxes posed by Parmenides and Zeno.
Socrates, his student Plato, and Plato’s student Aristotle develop some of their most important theories in response to puzzles from the Eleatic philosophers and in light of what they see as failures of the Pluralist and Atomist views.
In this course we will not only get a window into the philosophical views of these ancient philosophers. We will also experiment with the method of using paradoxes to evaluate our own assumptions and reasoning. Beginning with Parmenides’ puzzles about being and change, we will look at arguments and theories that respond to paradoxes and present new paradoxes, asking questions about the nature of being and non being, the rules that govern rational thought and inquiry, and the virtues whose exercise enables human beings to live good lives.
What are the goals this course is designed for you to meet? The course has several objectives, all aimed at the cultivation of skills important to philosophy and exemplified by the philosophers we will study.
The course has four core and three supplemental objectives:
C1. Identify the views of the authors or speakers in the text
C2. Accurately restate the arguments in the text in your own words
C3. Show understanding of the relationships between an author's views about being, knowledge, and the good life or between different authors' views
C4. Engage thoughtfully and respectfully with others
S1. Communicate and ably defend your own interpretation of an author's or speaker's view and argument for it
S2. Accurately explain the significance of the author's views or arguments for today or in their historical context
S3. Persuasively challenge an author's view or argument using your own argument
Your performance in the course will be assessed by how well you meet these objectives in each unit.
Plato, Parmenides, trans. Mary Louise Gill and Paul Ryan (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1996)
Plato, Theaetetus, trans. John McDowell, ed. Lesley Brown (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014)
Plato, Five Dialogues, trans. G.M.A. Grube (Indianapolis: Hackett, 2002)
Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, trans. Terence Irwin (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1995)
All other readings will be made available via the shared folder and the reading schedule.
What should you expect in class? Each class period, we will work through the portion of text assigned for that day. I will break up our class time into segments consisting of some combination of lecture, discussion, and in-class exercises like argument mapping (not always in that order, not always all three).
I’ll begin class with a lecture on context that will help to situate and understand the motivation for the ideas in the text. We will often use this time to read important passages from the readings aloud, so please bring your book with you.
Argument maps. We will use the Mindmup 2.0 tool to create, share, and revise maps of the arguments from the texts as well as arguments one could make in response to the author. You will turn in your own argument map before class as a homework assignment, and then during class you will often break up into groups to compare maps and create a revised, shared map which the whole class will discuss.
Reflective writing. Occasionally, you will receive a prompt and be asked to write a short reflection on the question and then share it in discussion.
Group reading response. Some class time will regularly be spent in groups of 2-3. Your small group may be asked to focus on a specific problem or passage from our readings with a partner or group, and then all the groups will come together to present to the rest of the class their response to what they focused on. You may be asked to cooperatively write a response to a prompt given by the instructor related to the ideas we will go on to discuss.
Peripatetic philosophy. Weather-permitting, we will occasionally practice philosophy as Aristotle, Plato, and Socrates did, namely, by walking around ("περιπατέω" in the Greek) and talking about our ideas.
A large portion of this class is discussion-based. You are expected to come to class prepared to ask specific questions pertaining to the readings and to answer questions posed by the instructor or classmates to help them deepen their understanding of the texts and ideas.
As we progress through the semester, you will be expected to contribute to our discussions about arguments and positions, assessing their quality, and ultimately asking philosophical questions and proposing ideas to generate class discussion.
Your course performance will be assessed on the basis of several assignments and your work in class. (More details on the Assignments page.)
Discussion. Each class period we will open the floor for discussion of the readings and issues raised in them; students should come prepared (and may be called on) to contribute to discussion. Your thoughtful and respectful contributions contribute to achievement of the fourth core objective.
Argument maps. Each week, you may turn in one argument map homework before class on the day we discuss the relevant reading. These will be evaluated on a pass/fail basis, with complete and correct maps receiving a passing mark. For more information, please look at the Argument Maps page. You should submit at least 3 and no more than 5 maps for credit.
Short paper. Every student must submit a short paper (~750 words) by the end of the semester that demonstrates the ability to do careful reading, present an author’s argument and ideas accurately in your own words and in a clear and organized fashion, and to engage the ideas philosophically. You will complete this in three stages during the semester. The final version of the short paper will be evaluated based on how well you motivate the question addressed in the argument by showing why it matters, the clarity of your explanation of the argument, the accuracy of your interpretation and the evidence you provide for it, the philosophical quality of your engagement with the argument, and technical quality of the writing.
Independent research presentation. This is an optional assignment you may complete to make progress towards objectives C1-C3 and S2. You will go to the library in person, read a book or parts of a book in ancient philosophy that is not part of our course, and then write and present a reflection to the class. Submit your reflection to the instructor.
Your performance in the course will be evaluated using standards-based grading. See the Resources page for more details. Grades are assigned based on your achievement of the core and supplemental objectives in each unit (see Grading Scale).
A- outstanding achievement
B- good achievement
C- mediocre achievement
D- unsatisfactory achievement
F- did not achieve any core standards
Academic Integrity. You are responsible for knowing and abiding by the University’s regulations regarding academic integrity (found in the Lowdown on pages 164-170 here). Here is a good rule of thumb for avoiding plagiarism: If it’s a direct quotation, cite it. If it’s a paraphrase of someone else’s idea, cite it. If it’s an idea you got from a discussion or reading, cite it. If in doubt, cite it. The only ideas not cited are those you come up with independently or that belong to general knowledge.[1] Plagiarism (intentional or unintentional) may result in an automatic failure of the course. All plagiarism will be reported to the Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs.
Accommodation. Please notify me in the first week of class if you need academic accommodation. You will need to provide certification from Disability Services (Office of Special Students Services, located in Room 270 of the Student Center, 251–460–7212).
I encourage all students to make use of the Writing Center at Marx Library.
Attendance. Attendance will be noted and regular attendance is a prerequisite (though not sufficient) for mastery of core objective 4-- thoughtful and respectful engagement with others.
5 or more unexcused absences are just cause for failure of the course. If you have a medical emergency or a university-sponsored event, you may present me with a note from the medical professional, director of the event, or your academic dean for an excused absence.
Electronics. Cell phones must be stowed and silenced during class. Students should bring a wi-phi enabled tablet or laptop to every class for mapping arguments using Mindmup. Laptop lids should be closed and tablet screens off unless we are mapping arguments or referencing an electronically accessed text. (Laptop use in classroom has been correlated with negative performance and distraction of classmates. See Resources for recent relevant studies.)
[1] I am grateful to Mark Murphy for this suggestion.