Introduction to Philosophical
Ethics, PHI 302
Fall 2014
Note: Students are responsible for understanding all the information
and policies presented in this syllabus. Students will be referred to it if
they have questions that are answered here. A syllabus is not a contract and
can be revised, if needed, to promote learning and other educational goals.
|
Class
|
12:00 pm - 12:50 pm
|
MWF
|
Sale Hall 107
|
Aug 20, 2014 - Dec 12, 2014
|
|
Nathan M. Nobis (P)
|
Turnitin.com
class ID # for 12 PM class 8427762 , password= ethics
|
Class
|
1:00 pm - 1:50 pm
|
MWF
|
Sale Hall 107
|
Aug 20, 2014 - Dec 12, 2014
|
Nathan M. Nobis
|
Turnitin.com
class ID number for 1 PM class = 8427773 ,
password = ethics
Email group: http://philosophy302.blogspot.com/p/email-group.html [ please sign up ]
Calendar: http://philosophy302.blogspot.com/p/course-calendar.html
[please sync calendar]
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Morehouse-College-Philosophy-Religion-Department/204777976219265
[please ‘like’!]
Instructor: Nathan Nobis, Ph.D., www.NathanNobis.com
Email: nathan.nobis@morehouse.edu
Telephone: 404-215-2607
office; 404-825-1740 cell
Office: Sale
Hall 113, Philosophy & Religion Department
Office
Hours: MWF 11-12; M 2-3;
and by appointment: please email!
Department of Philosophy and Religion: Mission and
Objectives:
The two-fold objective of this Department is to prepare students for
graduate or professional study in the fields of philosophy and religious
studies and to enable them to satisfy the College requirements in the general
education program. The courses in philosophy and religion seek to provide the
student not only with a firm base in these two academic disciplines, but also
with a means for self-examination and self-orientation. The work in philosophy
aims to develop a critical and analytical approach to all the major areas of
human inquiry. The work in religion aims to describe, analyze and evaluate the
role of religion in the life of humans since earliest times and how the
religious quest continues as a variegated and often tortuous climb toward human
growth and fulfillment.
1.
CATALOG COURSE DESCRIPTION: Provides an
introduction to philosophical reflection about the nature and function of
morality. Readings will include both historical and contemporary materials.
EXTENDED COURSE DESCRIPTION: This course provides students with the
opportunity to improve their skills at reasoning critically about moral issues.
Students will learn some basic logical concepts and argument analysis skills and apply them to theoretical and
practical questions about morality. We will practice identifying clear and precise moral conclusions and the
premises, or reasons, given for and against these conclusions. We will then
practice evaluating these reasons to see if they provide rational support for
these conclusions or not.
We will think about what helps people think
more carefully and critically about moral issues and what factors and
influences discourage this.
We will discuss influential ethical theories
and moral principles – answers to the questions ‘What’s the basic difference
between a morally permissible and a morally impermissible (or wrong) action?’
and ‘What makes wrong actions wrong and what makes permissible
actions permissible?’ – and apply our argument analysis skills to moral issues
such as the treatment of
disabled newborns, female genital mutilation, homosexuality, abortion, absolute
poverty, racism, sexism, and speciesism,
drug use and the criminalization of drug use, vegetarianism and the treatment
of animals, euthanasia and assisted suicide, and capital punishment, among
others.
2.
COURSE
PREREQUISITES: There are no formal prerequisites for this course. However,
students will benefit most from the course when they enter it with the
abilities to:
·
read critically and identify the
structure and components of an argumentative essay or passage, i.e., the
conclusion(s), the premises(s) or supporting elements, and so forth;
·
write clear, concise and simple grammatical,
spelling-error-free sentences and well-organized expository and argumentative
essays, as taught in Introductory English courses;
·
speak clearly, concisely, and grammatically.
Basic mathematical and scientific literacy is desirable.
Familiarity with moral issues, common positions taken on
them and reasons given in favor of these positions is desirable, since we will
build on any previous understanding.
Intellectual and moral virtues, such as curiosity, patience, and openness
to the possibility of error and the need for change, are desirable as well.
3.
COURSE OBJECTIVES: Upon successfully completing this course, students will be able to
use the set of argument analysis skills below to identify and evaluate moral arguments:
a.
identify
whether any presentation (“text”) is “morally argumentative” or not, i.e.,
whether it presents an argument for a moral conclusion on a moral issue or not;
b.
identify
conclusions of morally argumentative presentations,
evaluate these conclusions for clarity and precision, and (if needed)
reconstruct / restate the conclusion in clear and precise terms;
c.
identify
stated premises or reasons in morally argumentative
presentations, evaluate these conclusions for clarity and precision, and (if
needed) reconstruct / restate these premises in clear and precise terms;
d.
identify
(if needed) unstated premises
in argumentative presentations that are logically essential to the structure of
an argument and state them as part of the argument in clear and precise terms;
e.
identify
and distinguish factual/empirical/scientific and moral/philosophical premises
in moral arguments;
f.
evaluate
moral arguments as (1) logically valid or logically invalid and (2) sound or unsound (i.e., logically valid with true premises, or
not).
g.
identify
and explain reasons given to think an argument is sound, reasons to think it is
unsound (often using counterexamples
to general moral premises), and responses to these reasons.
Students will be able to accurately explain historically influential
moral theories and common arguments against them, in light of their implications,
explanatory power and theoretical virtues and vices.
Students will be able to accurately explain (in essays and oral
presentations) the most common arguments given on a number of controversial
moral issues, from a variety of perspectives, and criticisms of these
arguments. Students will be better able to evaluate their own moral views and
create their own moral arguments.
A GREEN SYLLABUS: This course contains content
that allows it to contribute to Morehouse’s Institute for Sustainable Energy
program, its planned academic Minor in Energy and the Morehouse-Wide Initiative for Sustainable Energy (M-WISE) program:
This content is indicated in green below.
4.
REQUIRED
MATERIALS, which must always be
brought to class: students without
course materials may be asked to leave and counted absent for that day.
- James
and Stuart Rachels, The
Elements of Moral Philosophy (McGraw Hill Publishing, 2012) (7th
edition is ideal, but any will do). http://highered.mcgraw-hill.com/sites/0078038243/information_center_view0/table_of_contents.html
- James
and Stuart Rachels, eds. The
Right Thing to Do (McGraw Hill Publishing, 2012) 6th
edition is ideal, but any edition will do: however, students are responsible
for getting copies of any readings in the current edition not found in
prior editions). http://highered.mcgraw-hill.com/sites/0078038243/information_center_view0/the_right_thing_to_do.html
- Bryan
Garner, HBR (Harvard Business Review) Guide
to Better Business Writing (2013): http://hbr.org/product/hbr-guide-to-better-business-writing/an/10946-PBK-ENG
Computer Policy:
Unless authorized for a specific
purpose, there will be no computer or phone use in class, not even for taking
notes. This is because scientific research has shown that computer use in class
is contrary to legitimate educational goals. See
Thus, any
“electronic readings” must be brought in hardcopy also.
5.
ASSIGNMENTS &
GRADING:
|
All
writing is done for an audience: for this class you should always assume that
your readers are not familiar with the course material so you must explain
everything very clearly for them, so that they understand and learn from you!
You must intentionally focus on effective communication of complex ideas and
arguments.
ALL WORK MUST HAVE STUDENTS’ NAME, EMAIL
ADDRESS, CLASS, CLASS TIME AND A VERY CLEAR INDICATION OF WHAT THE
ASSIGNMENT IS; POINTS WILL BE DEDUCTED IF ANY OF THESE ARE MISSING.
Discussing readings
and assignments is highly encouraged, but each student must always do his or
her own written work, unless specifically told otherwise.
|
- 10 weekly short writing assignments,
often on the readings, usually due Monday at the time of class, submitted
to the Turnitin.com system (see above for the Course ID and password): 5
points each, 50 points total.
- There
will likely be options for many of the writing assignments; generally
they are opportunities for the student to explain the issues and
arguments and so teach the material to someone else. Two typical options
are these:
- A
very detailed outlines or summaries of some
assigned readings. You will want them to be so detailed that you can use
them for a detailed open outline quiz.
- Alternatively,
an essay where you explain
the main topic of the reading, the main conclusion(s) advanced in the
reading, the main reason(s) given in favor of that conclusion; that
argument stated in logically valid form and your evaluation of the
argument as sound or unsound. This essay should also be so detailed that
it could be used for an open-note quiz.
- Group project: an online educational tool: a webpage or blog,
made in groups of 2 or 3 (and no
more), that introduces a moral issue, explains how to identify and evaluate moral argument, presents
and critically evaluates at least 5 arguments concerning that issue and
thus teachers the reader or
viewer how to think about that
moral issue. 20 points.
- Argumentative paper (approximately 5 pages) or lecture or speech
(around 15 minutes) done on webcam (or an alternative) and posted online
(privately or publicly). 20 points.
Including rough drafts, peer and instructor review and revisions. See:
http://www.jimpryor.net/teaching/
- One “service project,” that will involve
engaging some aspect of the community (such as other AUC students)
regarding some moral issue. There will be a variety of options here
including volunteering (at some organization that addresses a moral
issue), interview projects, hosting a forum, showing a film and holding a
discussion, and more. 20 points.
See http://philosophy302.blogspot.com/p/group-service-project-for-this.html
- A “comparative ethics” project: find, on
your own, a writing that presents a non-United States (or
non-north-American) and non-European perspective on a contemporary moral
issue that we discuss: so, e.g., an African or Asian or South American or
other perspective on a moral issue. Write up a report on the arguments
presented and evaluate the arguments. Details forthcoming. 10 points.
- 3 Tests: In class. 20
points each, 60 points total.
- Attendance and participation,
including taking class notes is required. Attendance will be taken at
the beginning of class. Each unexcused absence after 4 will result in a 2%
reduction from the student’s overall grade. Unexcused tardiness will
result in 1% reduction.
- EXTRA CREDIT ASSIGNMENTS. There
likely will be many extra credit opportunities, including this assignment
related to finding your “calling” through your career(s): http://morehousephilosophyandreligion.blogspot.com/p/career-exploration.html
No work will be accepted late except with a written,
college-approved excuse.
Final grades will be determined by the quantity and quality
of work done only: students who need a certain grade should work to ensure that
they earn that grade.
Plagiarism and cheating is not allowed and will be severely
penalized by either a zero on an assignment (and no chance for making up that
assignment) or failing the course. Do not consult any outside sources for any
assignments or examine the work of any other students – current or past
students – unless directed to do so by the instructor. Do not work with other
students unless instructed to do so.
Assignments will be
posted in class, on the calendar http://philosophy302.blogspot.com/p/course-calendar.html
, blog, and email list.
First reading and writing assignments:
For next Monday and Wednesday (August 25 &
27) we will discuss logic:
o Rachels, The
Right Thing to Do (RTD: Ch. 2, “Some Basic Points About Arguments,”
available here for students who don’t yet have the books: http://aphilosopher.googlepages.com/rachels-on-arguments.pdf
Also read, Weston, Preface,
Introduction, chapter on Deductive Arguments
Handouts on Overview of Logic & Arguments
· Overview of Basic Moral Evaluations: Morally Permissible,
Obligatory, Impermissible/Wrong
o Available in Making Moral Progress
here, in the section “Right and Wrong? Wrong”:
For next Friday (August 29):
o Rachels, The
Right Thing to Do: Ch.1 “A Short Introduction to Moral Philosophy,”
available here for students don’t yet have the books: http://aphilosopher.googlepages.com/rachels-intro-to-ethics.pdf
|
DUE (Monday September 1): WITHOUT READING ANYTHING ABOUT THESE TOPICS
– E.G., DO NOT SEARCH THE INTERNET – please write a short (2-3 page) essay
that addresses one of these questions:
·
Is it wrong to use illegal drugs, such as
marijuana?
·
Suppose a married woman did not any more
children but became pregnant. She could raise another child but does not want
to. Would it be wrong for her to have an abortion? Assume the father would
support her decision, whatever it is.
·
Are racism and/or sexism wrong? Why?
·
Is the death penalty wrong?
·
Is affirmative action wrong?
·
Or
another moral issue, with approval of the instructor, but not homosexuality
or the treatment of animals.
Please discuss at least three arguments relevant to
the issue.
Please write this essay on the basis of what you
already know: again, please do not do any research for this paper (if you do,
Turnitin might reveal that and you will be penalized!). This is an assignment
to measure where you are at now. If you take it seriously and put in a good
effort, your grade will reflect that. J
|
For Wednesday, September 3, Ch. 1,
"What is Morality?"
(Elements of Moral Philosophy, EMP):
Writing assignment 1: very detailed summary OR OUTLINE of
this chapter, covering every section. Due
that Wednesday via Turnitin.
After this, we will briefly review the later chapters on utilitarian and
Kantian moral theory in greater detail, discuss John Rawls’s moral theory, an
African ethical theory [ some writings from http://philpapers.org/s/Thaddeus%20Metz
[and then return to earlier chapters of
the Elements of Moral Philosophy and related readings in The Right Thing to Do.
Order of Readings, subject to
change with student input. We will not discuss all these readings below. exact dates and assignments will be
announced in class and online:
1. "Some
Basic Points about Arguments," James Rachels (RTD, #2). Available here
if you don’t yet have the books: http://aphilosopher.googlepages.com/rachels-on-arguments.pdf
Weston, Preface, Introduction,
chapter on Deductive Arguments
Logic Handout 1: http://sites.google.com/site/nobisphilosophy/arguments.pdf
Logic Handout 2: http://sites.google.com/site/nobisphilosophy/validargumentforms.pdf
2. James
Rachels, "A Short Introduction to Moral Philosophy" (RTD, #1). Available
here if you don’t yet have the books: http://aphilosopher.googlepages.com/rachels-intro-to-ethics.pdf
3. Ch.
1, "What is Morality?" (Elements)
5. Ch.
2, "The Challenge of Cultural Relativism" (Elements)
6. “What’s
Culture Got to Do with it? Excising the Harmful Tradition of Female
Circumcision,” Harvard Law Review, http://sites.google.com/site/nobisphilosophy/female_circumcision.pdf
- Also,
male circumcision.
7. "Monogamy:
A Critique," John McMurtry (RTD, #28) [This goes with the brief discussion
of polyamory on pp. 29-30 of Elements; the readings below also concern sexual
ethics.]
8. "Our
Sexual Ethics," Bertrand Russell (RTD, #29)
9. "Alcohol
and Rape," Nicholas Dixon (RTD, #30)
10. Ch. 3,
"Subjectivism in Ethics" (Elements)
11. "The
Subjectivity of Values," J. L. Mackie (RTD, #6) [This defends a version of
Ethical Subjectivism.]
12. Richard
Feldman on “Simple Moral Arguments”: http://sites.google.com/site/nobisphilosophy/feldman-simple-moral-arguments.pdf
14. "Is
Homosexuality Unnatural?" Burton M. Leiser (in older versions of RTD)
[This is an expanded version of the argument given on pp. 44-45 of Elements.]
Video: John Corvino: “What’s Morally Wrong with
Homosexuality?” http://johncorvino.com/wp/photos/ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SutThIFi24w
Argument worksheet: http://sites.google.com/site/nobisphilosophy/homosexuality-arguments.pdf
Blog/webpage small group assignment
14. Ch. 4,
"Does Morality Depend on Religion?" (Elements)
15. Fred
Feldman on abortion: http://sites.google.com/site/nobisphilosophy/fred_feldman_on_abortion.pdf
16. "On
the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion / Postscript on Infanticide," Mary
Anne Warren (RTD, #13)
17. "Why
Abortion Is Immoral," Don Marquis (RTD, #11) [One aspect of the abortion
debate is discussed on pp. 57-61 of Elements.]
18. "A
Defense of Abortion," Judith Jarvis Thomson (RTD, #12)
19. Nobis, Nathan and Jarr-Koroma, Abubakarr
Sidique (2010) "Abortion and Moral Arguments From
Analogy," The
American Journal of Bioethics, 10: 12, 59 — 61
Argument worksheet: http://sites.google.com/site/nobisphilosophy/abortion-worksheet.pdf
19. Ch. 5,
"Ethical Egoism" (Elements)
21. "9/11
and Starvation," Mylan Engel, Jr. (online) [Poverty is discussed on pp.
62-63 of Elements.]
22. "The
Singer Solution to World Poverty," Peter Singer (RTD, #18)
Argument worksheet: http://sites.google.com/site/nobisphilosophy/poverty-arguments.pdf
There are many more resources on
sustainability and sustainable development, justice and energy consumption,
justice and pollution and related topics.
|
22. "Is
Racial Discrimination Arbitrary?" Peter Singer (RTD, #32) [This essay asks
whether "The Principle of Equal Treatment" (as we call it on p. 77 of
Elements) applies to three difficult test cases.]
23. Ch. 6,
"The Idea of a Social Contract" (Elements)
24. "Letter
from the Birmingham City Jail," Martin Luther King, Jr. (RTD, #31) [King's
letter is quoted on pp. 90-91 of Elements.]
25. "In
Defense of Quotas," James Rachels (RTD, #33) [This reading goes with
King's "Letter from the Birmingham City Jail." In King's day, America
was so racist that preferential quotas were justified. Are they justified
today?]
26. Ch. 7,
"The Utilitarian Approach" (Elements)
27. "Utilitarianism,"
John Stuart Mill (RTD, #3)
29. "The
Morality of Euthanasia," James Rachels (RTD, #34) [Euthanasia is discussed
on pp. 98-101 of Elements.]
30. "The
Wrongfulness of Euthanasia,” J. Gay-Williams
31. "America's
Unjust Drug War," Michael Huemer (RTD, #26) [Marijuana is discussed on pp.
101-104 of Elements.]
32. Videos /
readings by Michelle Alexander on THE NEW JIM CROW: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gln1JwDUI64
32. "All
Animals Are Equal," Peter Singer (RTD, #14) [The treatment of animals is
discussed on pp. 104-108 of Elements.]
33. "Torturing
Puppies and Eating Meat: It's All in Good Taste," Alastair Norcross (RTD,
#15)
34. "Do
Animals Have Rights?" Tibor R. Machan (RTD, #16)
35. “Reasonable
Humans and Animals,” John Simmons: http://sites.google.com/site/nobisphilosophy/veg.pdf
Argument worksheet: http://sites.google.com/site/nobisphilosophy/veg-responses.pdf
There are many more resources on animal agriculture and sustainability,
energy consumption, global warming, pollution and related topics.
|
36. Ch. 8,
"The Debate over Utilitarianism" (Elements)
37. "Utilitarianism
and Integrity," Bernard Williams (RTD, #4) [This selection presents
Williams' most famous objection to Utilitarianism.]
38. "The
Experience Machine," Robert Nozick (RTD, #5) [This selection presents
Nozick's most famous objection to Hedonist Utilitarianism.]
39. Ch. 9,
"Are There Absolute Moral Rules?" (Elements)
40. "The
Categorical Imperative," Immanuel Kant (RTD, #7) [The Categorical
Imperative is discussed on pp. 127-129 of Elements.]
41. “Hellhole,”
Atul Gawande (RTD)
42. "The
Ethics of War and Peace," Douglas P. Lackey (RTD, #19) [The Allies'
conduct of the Second World War is discussed on pp. 124-126 of Elements.]
43. "Fifty
Years after Hiroshima," John Rawls (RTD, #20) [The bombing of Hiroshima is
discussed on pp. 124-126 of Elements.]
44. "What
Is Wrong with Terrorism?" Thomas Nagel (RTD, #21) [The readings on war and
terrorism go together. Also, Nagel implies that the prohibition on aiming at
the death of a harmless person is an absolute moral rule.]
45. "Liberalism,
Torture, and the Ticking Bomb," David Luban (RTD, #23) [One may ask: is
the prohibition on torture an absolute moral rule?]
46. Ch. 10,
"Kant and Respect for Persons" (Elements)
47. "A
Defense of the Death Penalty," Louis P. Pojman (RTD, #24) [Punishment is
discussed on pp. 139-145 of Elements. We discuss the death penalty specifically
on p. 143.]
48. "Why
the United States Will Join the Rest of the World in Abandoning Capital
Punishment," Stephen B. Bright (RTD, #25)
49. Ch. 11,
"Feminism and the Ethics of Care" (Elements)
50. "Caring
Relations and Principles of Justice," Virginia Held (RTD, #10) [See pp.
152-157 of Elements.]
51. Ch. 12,
"The Ethics of Virtue" (Elements)
52. "The
Virtues," Aristotle (RTD, #8)
53. "Master
Morality and Slave Morality," Friedrich Nietzsche (RTD, #9) [Nietzsche
glorifies the virtues of "master morality" and ridicules the vices of
"slave morality."]
54. Ch. 13, "What Would a Satisfactory
Moral Theory Be Like?" (Elements)
No comments:
Post a Comment