Introduction to Philosophical
Ethics, PHI 302
Spring 2015
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.
1-1:50 class: Intro
to Philosophical Ethics - 47626 - HPHI 302G – 02
[Note: For security reasons, Dr. Nobis will only respond to emails concerning grades
and confidential matters that are sent from an official Morehouse.edu email
address].
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!
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.
A general goal is to improve students’ abilities
to communicate about controversial issues: accurately state views and
arguments, responsibly raise and respond to questions and criticisms, and
communicate in clear, well-organized and effective ways.
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 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
- 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. There is a
lot of research on this:
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.
Please use this
template for your work; download the file and state from there:
Discussing readings
and assignments is highly encouraged, but each student must always do his or
her own written work, unless specifically told otherwise.
|
- 15 weekly short writing assignments, often on the readings, usually due Monday at the time of class, submitted through ): 5 points each, 75 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 3 or 4 (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 https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/87659135/courses/Ethics/Philosophical%20Community%20Service%20Project.rtf
- 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.
First reading and writing assignments:
For next Wednesday and Friday (January 21 and 23)
we will discuss logic:
o Rachels, The
Right Thing to Do (RTD: Ch. 2, “Some Basic Points About Arguments,”
available here: http://aphilosopher.googlepages.com/rachels-on-arguments.pdf
Almost all the concepts you need to
know for this class: http://www.nathannobis.com/2013/11/philosophical-ethics-handout.html
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 Monday (January 26):
o Rachels, The
Right Thing to Do: Ch.1 “A Short Introduction to Moral Philosophy,”
available here: http://aphilosopher.googlepages.com/rachels-intro-to-ethics.pdf
|
DUE (Friday, January 30): 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
|
Writing assignment 1: very detailed summary OR OUTLINE of
this chapter, covering every section. Due
Monday, February 2.
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.
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 (Right Thing to Do): http://aphilosopher.googlepages.com/rachels-on-arguments.pdf
2.
Nobis: basic
concepts handout: http://www.nathannobis.com/2013/11/philosophical-ethics-handout.html
3.
Logic Handout 1: http://sites.google.com/site/nobisphilosophy/arguments.pdf
4.
Logic Handout 2: http://sites.google.com/site/nobisphilosophy/validargumentforms.pdf
5.
James Rachels, "A Short Introduction to Moral
Philosophy" (Right Thing to Do). Available here: http://aphilosopher.googlepages.com/rachels-intro-to-ethics.pdf
6.
Ch. 1, "What is Morality?" (Elements)
7.
Ch. 2, "The Challenge of Cultural
Relativism" (Elements)
8.
“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
a.
Also, male circumcision.
9.
Ch. 3, "Subjectivism in Ethics" (Elements)
10. Richard
Feldman on “Simple Moral Arguments”: http://sites.google.com/site/nobisphilosophy/feldman-simple-moral-arguments.pdf
11. Video
on Simple Moral Arguments: http://www.makingmoralprogress.com/
12. Video:
John Corvino: “What’s Morally Wrong with Homosexuality?” http://johncorvino.com/wp/photos/ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SutThIFi24w
13. Argument
worksheet: http://sites.google.com/site/nobisphilosophy/homosexuality-arguments.pdf
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
17. "Why
Abortion Is Immoral," Don Marquis
18. "A
Defense of Abortion," Judith Jarvis Thomson
19. Nobis, Nathan and Jarr-Koroma, Abubakarr Sidique
(2010) "Abortion and Moral Arguments From
Analogy," The
American Journal of Bioethics, 10: 12, 59 — 61
20. Argument
worksheet: http://sites.google.com/site/nobisphilosophy/abortion-worksheet.pdf
21. Ch.
5, "Ethical Egoism" (Elements)
22. Materials
on “Effective Altruism”: http://www.nathannobis.com/2013/11/effective-altruism.html
23. "9/11
and Starvation," Mylan Engel, Jr. (online)
24. "The
Singer Solution to World Poverty," Peter Singer
25. Argument
worksheet: http://sites.google.com/site/nobisphilosophy/poverty-arguments.pdf
|
Nathan Nobis, entry on “Peter Singer,” in Encyclopedia of Environmental Ethics and
Philosophy, J. Baird Callicott and Robert Frodeman, eds., Macmillan
Reference, 2008: http://aphilosopher.googlepages.com/singer-encyclopedia.pdf
Peter Singer, “One Atmosphere,” from his One World: The Ethics of Globalization
(Yale University Press, 2002)
Carr, Edward R.
“Sustainable Development” For the Encyclopedia
of Environmental Ethics and Philosophy, Vol 2, J. Baird Callicott and Robert
Frodeman, eds. Macmillan Reference USA: 295-298, 2008. http://goo.gl/IWXE0
There are many more
resources on sustainability and sustainable development, justice and energy
consumption, justice and pollution and related topics.
|
26. Ch.
6, "The Idea of a Social Contract" (Elements)
27. "Letter
from the Birmingham City Jail," Martin Luther King, Jr
28. Ch.
7, "The Utilitarian Approach" (Elements)
29. “One
Nurse’s Story,” http://sites.google.com/site/nobisphilosophy/one_nurses_story.pdf
30. "Active
and Passive Euthanasia," James Rachels
31. "America's
Unjust Drug War," Michael Huemer (RTD, #26)
32. Videos
/ readings by Michelle Alexander on THE NEW JIM CROW: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gln1JwDUI64
33. "All
Animals Are Equal," Peter Singer
34. "Torturing
Puppies and Eating Meat: It's All in Good Taste," Alastair Norcross (RTD,
#15)
35. “Reasonable
Humans and Animals,” John Simmons: http://sites.google.com/site/nobisphilosophy/veg.pdf
36. 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)
39. Ch. 9,
"Are There Absolute Moral Rules?" (Elements)
46. Ch. 10,
"Kant and Respect for Persons" (Elements)
49. Ch. 11, "Feminism
and the Ethics of Care" (Elements)
51. Ch. 12,
"The Ethics of Virtue" (Elements)
54. Ch. 13, "What Would a Satisfactory
Moral Theory Be Like?" (Elements)
No comments:
Post a Comment