Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
304 lines (236 loc) · 11.4 KB

700f2011.markdown

File metadata and controls

304 lines (236 loc) · 11.4 KB
Raw
layout title section
name
Syllabus — First Year Seminar
courses

Philosophy 700: First Year Seminar

David Sanson and William Taschek

Fall 2011

Readings

The required reading for this course consist in (i) a selection of 10 Primary Texts, organized into three modules, (ii) a strong recommendation that you explore relevant supplementary readings—some examples of which are provided below, and (iii) the weekly discussion essays and reaction papers. Each week we will focus on a different Primary Text. A copy of each of the Primary Texts is available as a PDF on the Carmen site for this course.

You are expected to come to class having thoroughly read and carefully studied the Primary Text that is the focus of any given meeting—and prepared to actively participate in the class discussion. You are also expected to explore at least some supplementary readings and to have read and reflected upon the weekly discussion essays and circulated reaction papers.

Assignments

In addition to keeping up with the assigned reading (primary texts, seminar discussion papers, reaction papers), exploring relevant secondary texts, and actively participating in class discussion, each student will be required to complete the following:

  • Two seminar discussion papers. These papers are intended to be substantive critical discussions/evaluations of some aspect of the primary text that is assigned for a given week. They should be about 7-10 pages long. You are to distribute them via email as attached documents to the whole class a couple of days before the day on which the primary text at which they are directed is assigned. We strongly suggest that you discuss the direction you plan to take in this paper with at least one of us before you submit it.

  • Two comments on discussion papers. The idea here is for you to assume something like the role that the "commentator" assumes in an APA session—presenting a brief critical evaluation of the principal arguments/positions defended in the relevant discussion paper. Your primary aim is to generate discussion not only of the seminar discussion paper but, importantly, of the primary text as well. Your comment and discussion should take up about an hour (or a bit more) of the seminar period. Though not required, a handout of some sort might sometimes be helpful.

  • Five one to two page reaction papers—either on the primary reading for a given week or on that week’s discussion paper. These are to be posted to the whole class no later than 5PM on the day before the seminar meeting. No more than two of your reaction papers can focus on material from any one of our three modules.

  • A substantial, 15-25 page seminar paper. This can either be a significant expansion and refinement of one of your presentation papers or something completely new. In any case, before you start on this paper, you should discuss your plans with one or both of us. And, needless to say, you may want to consult with us in the course of writing the paper as well. If you are writing on a topic distinct from one of your two presentation papers, we will also be willing to comment on a complete draft of it (but not on notes toward a draft!), if it is turned into us sufficiently in advance.

MODULE ONE

Week I

Tuesday, Sept 27

Primary Text: Quine, "Two Dogmas of Empiricism"

Sample Supplementary Readings:

  • Grice/Strawson, "In Defense of a Dogma" (1956), reprinted in Grice’s Studies in the Way of Words, pp.196-212.
  • Boghossian, "Analyticity", in A Companion to the Philosophy of Language, ed. by Hale/Wright, pp. 331-368.
  • Quine, "Carnap and Logical Truth" (1954), reprinted in his The Ways of Paradox, pp. 107-132.
  • Putnam, "The Analytic and the Synthetic" (1962), reprinted in his Mind, Language, and Reality, pp.33-69.
  • Burge, "Belief and Synonymy", Journal of Philosophy, 75 (1978), pp. 119-138
  • Williamson, Timothy, "Metaphysical Conceptions of Analyticity"and "Epistemological Conceptions of Analyticity", Chapters 3 and 4, respectively, of The Philosophy of Philosophy (2007), pp. 48-133.

Week II

Tuesday, Oct 4

Primary Text: Kripke, "Identity and Necessity"

Sample of Supplementary Readings:

  • Gibbard, "Contingent Identity", Journal of Philosophical Logic, 4 (1974) pp. 187-221.
  • Evans, "Reference and Contingency", reprinted in his Collected Papers, pp. 178-213.
  • Dummett, "Notes on an Attempted Refutation of Frege", Appendix to Chapter 5 of his Frege: The Philosophy of Language, pp. 110-151.
  • Stanley, "Rigidity and Content", Language, Thought and Logic: Essays in Honour of Michael Dummett, ed. by Heck, pp. 131-156.
  • Chalmers, "Two Dimensional Semantics", The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Language, ed. by LePore and Smith (2007).
  • Soames, "The Modal Argument: Wide Scope and Rigidified Descriptions" (1998), "The Philosophical Significance of Kripkean Necessity A Priori" (2006), "Knowledge of Manifest

Natural Kinds" (2004), essays Five, Six, and Seven of his Philosophical Essays, Volume II: The Philosophical Significance of Language (2009).

Week III

Tuesday, Oct 11

Primary Text: Fine, "Essence and Modality"

Sample of Supplementary Readings:

  • Adams, "Primitive Thisness and Primitive Identity." Journal of Philosophy, (1979), pp. 5–26.
  • Fine, "The Varieties of Necessity." In Conceivability and Possibility, (2002), pp. 253–82.
  • Lewis, "Counterparts of Persons and Their Bodies." The Journal of Philosophy (1971), pp. 203–11.
  • Plantinga, Chapters 2 and 3 of The Nature of Necessity (1974).
  • Rosen, "The limits of contingency." In Identity and Modality(2006), ed. Fraser MacBride, pp. 13–39.
  • Zalta, "Essence and Modality." Mind (2006), pp. 659–94.

Week IV

Tuesday, Oct 18

Primary Text: Lewis, "New Work for a Theory of Universals"

Sample of Supplementary Readings:

  • Chalmers, "Coda, part 2" in Constructing the World, (unpublished) http://consc.net/constructing/.
  • Hawthorne, "Intrinsic Properties and Natural Relations" Philosophy and Phenomenological Research (2001), pp. 399–403.
  • Langton and Lewis, "Defining Intrinsic" Philosophy and Phenomenological Research (1998), pp. 333–45.
  • MacBride, "The Particular–Universal Distinction: A Dogma of Metaphysics?" Mind(2005), pp. 565–614.
  • Sider, Ted. "Reference Magnetism," Chapter 3, Section 2 of Writing the Book of the World (forthcoming).
  • Yablo, "Intrinsicness," Philosophical Topics (1999), 479–505.

MODULE TWO

Week V

Tuesday, Oct 25

Primary Text: Davidson, "Actions, Reasons, and Causes"

Sample of Supplementary Readings:

  • Frankfurt, "The Problem of Action" in The Importance of What We Care About, Cambridge, 1988, pp. 70-84.
  • Bratman, "Two Faces of Intention", Philosophical Review (1984), pp. 375-405.
  • Ginet, "Reasons Explanation of Action: An Incompatibilist Account ", *Philosophical Perspectives 3,*1989, pp. 17-46.
  • Hornsby, "Agency and Causal Explanation", Chapter 10 in Causal Explanation, ed. by Heil and Mele (1993).
  • Velleman, "What Happens When Someone Acts", MindVol 101, 1992, pp. 461-81.
  • Wilson, *The Intentionality of Human Action,*Stanford, 1989, Ch. 7.

Week VI

Tuesday, Nov 1

Primary Text: Williams, "Internal and External Reasons" and Postscript.

Sample of Supplementary Readings:

  • Williams, "Internal Reasons and the Obscurity of Blame", in Making Sense of Humanity¸ Cambridge, 1995 pp. 35-45.
  • Hooker, "Williams’ Argument against External Reasons", *Analysis,*Vol. 47, 1987, pp. 42-44.
  • McDowell, "Might there be External Reasons", *in World, Mind and Ethics,*Cambridge, 1995 pp. 68-85.
  • Parfit, "Reasons and Motivation", *Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society,*1997, pp. 99-130.
  • Scanlon, "Williams on Internal and External Reasons" in *What We Owe to Each Other,*Harvard, 1998, pp. 363-73.
  • Korsgaard, "Skepticism about Practical Reason", *Journal of Philosophy,*Vo. 83, 1986, pp. 5-25.

Week VII

Tuesday, Nov 8

Primary Text: Foot, "Morality as a System of Hypothetical Imperatives"

Sample of Supplementary Readings:

  • Frankena, "The Philosopher’s Attack on Morality", Philosophy (1974), pp. 345-356.
  • Foot, "A Reply to Professor Frankena", Philosophy (1975); reprinted in Foot’s Virtues and Vices, pp. 174-180.
  • McDowell, "Are Moral Requirements Hypothetical Imperatives?" Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Vol. 52 (1978), pp. 13-29.
  • Foot, "Rationality and Virtue" (1994), essay 10 in her Moral Dilemmas (2002), pp. 159-174.
  • Foot, "Recantation", (1994), appended to the reprinting of MSHP in Moral Discourse and Practice, ed. by Darwall, Gibbard, and Railton (1997), p. 322.
  • Lawrence, "The Rationality of Morality" in Virtues and Reasons, ed. by Hursthouse et al (1995).

MODULE THREE

Week VIII

Tuesday, Nov 15

Primary Text: Van Cleve, "Foundationalism, Epistemic Principles, and the Cartesian Circle"

Sample of Supplementary Readings:

  • Descartes, Meditations on First Philosophy, esp. Meditations I-III.
  • Chisholm, "The Problem of the Criterion", Chapter 7 of Theory of Knowledge (1977), pp. 119-134.
  • DeRose, "Descartes, Epistemic Principles, Epistemic Circularity, and Scientia," Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 73 (1992), pp. 220-238.
  • Sosa, "Philosophical Scepticism and Epistemic Circularity," Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 68 (1994), pp. 263-290.
  • Cohen, "Basic Knowledge and the Problem of the Problem of Easy Knowledge." Philosophy and Phenomenological Research (2002), pp. 309-329.
  • Boghossian, "How are Objective Epistemic Reasons Possible?" Philosophical Studies (2001), pp.1-40.

Week IX

Tuesday, Nov 22

Primary Text: Pryor, "The Skeptic and the Dogmatist"

Sample of Supplementary Readings:

  • Moore, "Proof of an External World", Proceedings of the British Academy 25 (1939), pp. 273-300. Reprinted in Philosophical Papers, pp. 126-148.
  • Neta, "Perceptual Evidence and the New Dogmatism", Philosophical Studies (2004), pp. 199-214.
  • Silins, "Basic Justification and the Moorean Response to the Skeptic", Oxford Studies in Epistemology, Vol, 2 (2008).
  • Burge, "Perceptual Entitlement", Philosophy and Phenomenological Research (2003), pp. 503-548.
  • Pryor vs. Williams, "Is There Immediate Justification?", Contemporary Debates in Epistemology, ed. by Steup and Sosa (2005), pp. 181-216. [This is a set of two papers, Pryor defending the existence of immediate justification and Williams questioning the need for it.]

Week X

Tuesday, Nov 29

Primary Text: Cohen, "Contextualism, Skepticism and the Structure of Reasons"

Sample of Supplementary Readings:

  • Lewis, "Elusive Knowledge", Australasian Journal of Philosophy(1996), pp. 549-567.
  • De Rose, "Contextualism and Knowledge Attributions", Philosophy and Phenomenological Research (1992), pp. 913-929.
  • Fantl and McGrath, "Evidence, Pragmatics and Justification", Philosophical Review (2002), pp. 67-94.
  • Hawthorne, "Sensitive Moderate Invariantism", in his Knowledge and Lotteries (2004), pp. 157-191.
  • McFarland, "The Assessment Sensitivity of Knowledge Attributions", Oxford Studies in Epistemology, Vol. 1 (2005).
  • Richard, "Contextualism and Relativism", Philosophical Studies(2004), pp. 215-241.