Instructor: Jack Purcell |
Office: JUB 303. |
Office Hours: M - W 1:30 - 2:30 & by appt |
Phone: 898-5774 |
course requirements
Each student will be required to:
- write a mid-term take-home exam.
- The exam will be due Tuesday, October 9.
- write a final term paper of 8 - 12 pages on a topic /philosopher covered in the course. The paper will be due Thursday, December 13. No late papers, since it's the penultimate day of the session!
- direct an in-class discussion from the "discussion topics" sheet.
- Hopefully the discussion sessions will not be solo, I would like to have at least two people prepared to spearhead an hour long discussion. You may or may not want to collaborate with one another (it might be more exciting and instructional if you don't collaborate beforehand).
- You will need to prepare an outline of the topic you intend to discuss. This outline will need to be turned in for credit. The outline should contain a clear statement of the problem, an outline of how the philosopher(s) in question address the problem, and some critical comments and/or questions. The purpose of this game is to attempt to get some "minds-on" philosophizing. Here is a suggestion on hou you might proceed (though you may choose any approach you think will help get a discussion going):
- Give an overview of the passage/topic at hand, and then raise questions relevant to the section/topic.
- If you wish , you may hand out an outline or brief summary of what points you deem relevant.
Concerning grades. If you wish, we will schedule short "conferences" (for lack of a better term) to discuss your grade. The grades will be determined on the basis of an evaluation of the following: the two exams, the final paper, the handling of discussion topics, and general class discussion.
class format. I do not plan to lecture entirely, though I will if there is insufficient or inadequate discussion. The class will be oriented toward discussion of the reading material. Consequently, you’ll need to keep up with the reading. If needed I may direct questions to individuals and/or instigate the pop quiz, if it appears that the class is not keeping up with the reading. It will be important for you to raise questions concerning the reading. If you don’t understand a passage or think it might be interpreted differently from the way we’re treating it in class, speak up!
required texts
(in the order we will use them)
|
author |
title |
publisher |
|
wheelwright |
the presocratics |
macmillan |
|
plato |
The Symposium |
hackett |
|
plato |
the republic |
hackett |
|
aristotle |
the nicomachean ethics |
hackett |
|
A.A. Long |
The Hellenistic Philosophers |
Cambridge |
discussion dates and topics
1. Tuesday, September 4: The Milesians.
a - Compare the Milesian's view of the cosmos with that of a contemporary (physicist's) view of the role of matter, or what the Milesians call the "elements." It may be helpful to think of this comparison in terms of the sharp distinction between mind (or spirit) and matter within at least contemporary western accounts.
b - Compare the Milesian's view of the role community and cosmos have on an understanding of self with a modern or contemporary "egoistic" version of self. That is, how do we tend to understand ourselves in relation to others and nature? Is the Milesians' view any different?
c - Explain the Milesian view of the nature of the cosmos in terms of its comparisons and contrasts with Greek Mythology, either through a particular myth, or from a more general standpoint of Greek mythology, e.g. their cosmology.
2. Tuesday, September 18: Heraclitus and Parmenides.
a - Are there any relevant similarities between Heraclitus' philosophy and the philosophy of Taoism?
b - Defend the view that Heraclitus' and Parmenides' philosophies really say the same thing, i.e. that their philosophies are radically similar in substance.
c - Compare/contrast Heraclitus and Parmenides on what you might take to be their theory of child development.
3. Tuesday, October 23: Plato
a - Defend and/or attack the thesis that (i) the state proposed in the Republic is neither Plato's ideal, nor something he desired, and/or (ii) that current U.S. politics is representative of the state fashioned by Plato in the Republic.
b – Trace the ascent, presented by Socrates in the Symposium, from eros to philosophy and account for why the desire of the would-be philosopher is so peculiar.
c - Defend Plato's account of the censorship of literature, music, poetry, etc. as given in the Republic. Include references to contemporary pop music (or orchestral, symphonic, jazz, blues, gospel, punk, new wave, country, bluegrass, folk, etc.) and indicate what you think Plato's response to it would be and explain why.
d - Present what you would take to be Plato's critique or praise of American cinema (you may choose to discuss television, but since I haven't watched television for several years, I'll be of no help).
4. Tuesday, November 20: Aristotle
a - Defend the view (from an Aristotelian ethical perspective) that Plato's ethics is useless.
b - Formulate and either Defend or attack the view that, from the standpoint of Aristotelian ethics, the phrase "business ethics" is an oxymoron. It may be helpful to think of this in terms of huge multinational corporations.
c - Critique the state-run University/educational system from the standpoint of Aristotle's ethics.
d - Provide an Aristotelian analysis of some popular work of fiction, e.g. science-fiction, romance novels, horror, cyberpunk, or of some version of popular culture. That is, what's wrong with it and what's good about it.
5. Thursday, December 6: The Stoics
Dependent on time!