Iannone's Syllabus

PHILOSOPHY 241 ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS Iannone

Problems concerning how people treat the land, the air, the wildlife, the plantlife, have been popularly viewed as urgent ethical problems. This prompts the following questions: Are they? If so, are our traditional ethical notions fit to deal with these problems? If not, what should take their place and why? Some ecologists—Garrett Hardin among them—have claimed that certain pressing environmental problems cannot be solved without rejecting some of our most deeply entrenched ethical notions. Others—most notably Aldo Leopold—have claimed that no such rejection is needed. They see the solution to those problems simply in extending those notions' scope of application, say, by granting moral--and legal--rights to forests, lakes, and rivers.

There is both a great deal of confusion and widespread heated controversy, indeed, there often is outright confrontation about these matters, as well as about related, more specific areas of environmental and ecological concern. Some argue that the environment and, indeed, people's freedom and well-being should be protected by pursuing soft energy paths thus doing away with nuclear energy and cutting pollution and oil imports. While others think adoption of soft energy paths would be simply irresponsible. Some hail the green revolution as the way out of otherwise unavoidable world hunger. While others see it as the way to worldwide agricultural disaster. What should be done about these matters given that there is controversy, and sometimes even confrontation about them? And what moral standards, criteria, laws, or principles would help soundly establish what should be done? The course will center around these questions.

This will lead us to raise still other questions: What attitudes, beliefs, and presuppositions are at the basis of the claims people make about the various matters of controversy? What errors, if any, are involved in these attitudes, beliefs, and presuppositions? Must the attitudes be modified in order to deal with the problems arising in the controversies? Or could sound policy making about the problems be carried out without having to modify attitudes? How successful is such policy making likely to be? And what is it to deal with the problems successfully?

We will consider as many of the environmental controversies indicated above as time and the interest of the class permit, and will be open to consider other environmental controversies the members of the class may want to discuss.

In trying to establish what should be done about the above matters, we shall critically consider attitudes generally involved in the controversies and central beliefs and presuppositions connected with these attitudes. We shall try to determine their role, if any, in generating ethical problems concerning the environment, setting up constraints for their resolution, and helping address the problems. We shall also seek to establish whether the attitudes examined are significantly associated with any practices or institutions, and whether any of the beliefs and presuppositions they involve are false. And we shall take a brief look at the history of those attitudes and the practices and institutions that appear to be associated with them. Our emphasis, however, will be on policies. The upshot of our discussions should be a basic approach for establishing morally sound policies in dealing with ethics and policy making concerning the environment.

A successful inquiry along the above lines requires intelligent experience, careful discussion and research, and hard thinking. We will try to do all these things. There will be readings about specific matters relevant to environmental ethics, in class discussion of these readings, and critical examination of hypotheses for resolving practical and theoretical problems that arise with regard to the above as well as other matters of ethical relevance.

Each student will be required to write two papers and a final, and to present a report (which is not a research paper, but a piece written from the standpoint of a teacher), in writing or orally, on a topic relevant to the course. Students will have to pass the final in order to pass the course.

The Final: This will be a take-home piece of work emphasizing the topics discussed in class. Students will have about a weak to write it.

The Papers: These will be pieces of work reflecting the student's careful research and independent thinking. (Make sure you are aware of the university's policies on plagiarism). In order for the paper to receive a passing grade, the student submitting it must have submitted a first draft and a final version of the paper proposal by the proposal’s deadlines stated below, and the final version of the proposal must have been approved in writing and signed by the instructor.

The Proposals: Preparing a proposal involves the following four main steps:

first, choose a topic that is philosophically relevant and that also interests you. You may use the materials in the books for the course to select one;

second, to make sure you are on the right track, check with your instructor before proceeding;

third, after your instructor approves your topic, use the Selected Bibliography at the end of the book, or any resources your instructor may suggest, to prepare a short list of philosophical readings that you intend to use in writing your paper;

fourth, read these materials and, on the basis of the information thus acquired, write a proposal.

Proposals should be one to two pages long and include:

first, a topic, that is, what the paper will be about;

then, the main question(s) the student intends to address about this topic; next, any hunch(es) or definite view(s) the student may have about what the paper's conclusion will turn out to be;

finally, a rough abstract of the reasoning leading to this conclusion.

They should be accompanied by the list of readings you intend to use in writing the paper.

Developing a paper proposal usually takes a great deal of work and various meetings with the instructor to take care of a variety of details affecting the viability of the proposed paper. It is accordingly best for students to start working on a proposal for their first paper as soon as possible, so that there are no surprises at proposal submission time and students can meet the paper submission deadlines.

The Report to the Class: This piece of work may take a variety of forms. It may be in writing (say, an annotated bibliography on a matter of business controversy), or it may be oral (say, leading a class discussion about a previously shown film or videotape which addressed some moral problems in or about business). Report-topics may, but need not overlap with paper topics. Students are also required to consult with the instructor about their proposed reports. In the case of oral reports, this should be planned early enough to facilitate the presentation's scheduling.

PHILOSOPHY 240 ETHICAL PROBLEMS IN BUSINESS Iannone

Ethical investment, questionable foreign payments, disclosure, manipulative advertising, dumping, mergers, sexual and racial discrimination in employment, sexual harassment in the workplace, employees' privacy, union givebacks, whistleblowing, big and small business responsibilities and regulations are at the center of contemporary controversies in business. Those involved in these controversies often engage in heated arguments about such questions as: Should investors avoid investing in multinational corporations which operate in countries with oppressive governments? Should multinationals be subject to restrictions concerning foreign payments aimed at obtaining contracts or at speeding up registration procedures for their products? Should a firm ever publish financial reports which may look good to unsophisticated investors but, though legal, are inaccurate or misleading? Is it ever permissible for advertising to aim at manipulating consumers? Should corporations ever engage in dumping as a way of gaining control of foreign markets for their products? Should there be laws against mergers? Should any employee be treated differently from others on the basis of race or sex? What should firms do to deal with sexual harassment among their members? Is it ever permissible for employers to use lie detector tests as a requirement for promotions or employment? Should unions ever accept cuts in pay or benefits for the sake of keeping the number of jobs intact? Should employees ever blow the whistle when their employers engage in questionable business practices? Should new consumer, environmental or other legislation be introduced to regulate the activities of big and small business?

The matters of controversy are many. What should be done about these matters given that there is controversy, and sometimes even confrontation about them? The course will center around this question. This will lead us to raise still other questions: What attitudes, beliefs, and presuppositions are at the basis of the claims people make about the various matters of controversy concerning business? What errors, if any, are involved in these attitudes, beliefs, and presuppositions? Must the attitudes be modified in order to deal with the problems arising in the controversies? Or could sound policy making about the problems be carried out without having to modify attitudes? How successful is such policy making likely to be? And what is it to deal with the problems successfully? In dealing with these questions, we shall critically consider people's attitudes toward business, themselves, and others, as well as central beliefs and presuppositions connected with these attitudes. We shall try to determine their role, if any, in generating moral problems in and about business, setting up constraints for their resolution, and helping address the problems. We shall also seek to establish whether the attitudes examined are significantly associated with any practices or institutions, and whether any of the beliefs and presuppositions they involve are false. And we shall take a brief look at such things as the history of these attitudes and the practices and institutions which appear to be significantly associated with them. Our emphasis, however, will be on policies, and we will especially focus on current political and economic circumstances—e.g., those associated with globalization—, which often have a dominant role in creating moral problems in and about business and setting limits to the policies capable of addressing them both effectively and tolerably. In the process, we will devote various class-meetings to examine and various influential types of moral theories—consequentialist, deontological, character-centered, pragmatic, and combined moral theories—and their applicability to moral problems in and about business. The upshot of all this will be a basic theoretical approach for establishing morally sound policies concerning business and its relations to individuals and society.

Establishing morally sound policies and developing an approach for establishing them calls for intelligent experience, careful discussion and research, and hard thinking. We will try to do all these things. There will be readings on what has been said on various sides of various business matters of controversy, in class discussion of these readings, and critical examination of hypotheses for resolving the problems that arise in the controversies. A successful inquiry along the above lines requires intelligent experience, careful discussion and research, and hard thinking. We will try to do all these things. There will be weekly readings about specific moral theories, in class discussion of these readings, and critical examination of hypotheses for resolving moral problems and issues.

Each student will be required to write two papers and a take-home final, and to present a report, in writing or orally, on a topic relevant to the course, for the benefit of those who would like to start doing research about it.

The Final: This will be a take-home piece of work emphasizing the topics discussed in class. Students will have about a week to write it.

The Papers: These will be pieces of work reflecting the student's careful research and independent thinking. (Make sure you are aware of the university's policies on plagiarism.) In order for a paper to receive a passing grade, the student submitting it must have submitted a first draft and a final version of the paper proposal by the proposal’s deadlines stated below, and the final version of the proposal must have been approved in writing and signed by the instructor.

The Proposals: Preparing a proposal involves the following four main steps:

first, choose a topic that is philosophically relevant and that also interests you. You may use the materials in the books for the course to select one;

second, to make sure you are on the right track, check with your instructor before proceeding;

fourth, read these materials and, on the basis of the information thus acquired, write a proposal.

Proposals should be one to two pages long and include:

first, a topic, that is, what the paper will be about;

then, the main question(s) the student intends to address about this topic; next, any hunch(es) or definite view(s) the student may have about what the paper's conclusion will turn out to be;

finally, a rough abstract of the reasoning leading to this conclusion.

They should be accompanied by the list of readings you intend to use in writing the paper

Philosophy 242: Ethical Problems in Technology Page

Iannone

Philosophy 242 ETHICAL PROBLEMS IN TECHNOLOGY Iannone

Our times, like all times, are not easy to live in. They are, however, especially complicated, partly because of unprecedented technological developments worldwide. Modern industrial and farming technologies; information technology; recombinant DNA technology; modern health care technology; nuclear technology; and aerospace technology often lead to local, regional, national, and even global consequences, some quite threatening. The increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide is one such consequence. Just as worrisome are the increase in atmospheric fluorocarbons; in haze-causing pollutants and acid rain; the unrelenting proliferation of highly destructive nuclear, conventional, chemical and, some say, biological weapons. Add to these the piling up of nuclear and chemical wastes; the artificial creation and growing production of new organisms that threaten to create new animal and plant diseases, sources of cancer, and novel epidemics; the increasing bureaucratization and expanding technocratic character of value choices in medical care; the highly concentrated computer storage of sensitive information about ordinary citizens, which is managed by business or government organizations and, too often, easily accessible; and the beginning of the militarization of space. The list keeps on growing at an increasing pace, at times not only exceeding expectations, but moving beyond the wildest speculations of fantasy and science fiction.

Such developments have prompted a great deal of discussion as to whether, and to what extent, the technologies that contribute to their existence threaten the privacy, freedom, well-being, self-image, even the very existence of human beings, the well-being of non-humans, the stability of innumerable eco-systems, and the future of planet Earth. There is both a great deal of confusion and widespread heated controversy, indeed, there often is outright confrontation about these matters. Some argue that the environment and people's freedom and well-being should be protected by pursuing soft energy paths thus doing away with nuclear energy and cutting pollution and oil imports; while others think adoption of soft energy paths would be simply irresponsible. Some hail the green revolution as the way out of otherwise unavoidable world hunger; while others see it as the way to worldwide agricultural disaster. Some welcome recombinant DNA technology as the way to free humanity from hereditary diseases; while others consider it a sure way to bring about worse and uncontrollably spreading diseases onto humans and non-humans. Some argue the accelerated development of more and more powerful nuclear, conventional, chemical, and biological weapons is the only way of attaining effective national security; while others think it both ineffective and a certain way of bringing about total planetary doom. The technological matters of controversy are many. What should be done about these matters given that there is controversy, and sometimes even confrontation about them? The course will center around this question. This will lead us to raise still other questions: What attitudes, beliefs, and presuppositions are at the basis of the claims people make about the various matters of controversy? What errors, if any, are involved in these attitudes, beliefs, and presuppositions? Must the attitudes be modified in order to deal with the problems arising in the controversies? Or could sound policy making about the problems be carried out without having to modify attitudes? How successful is such policy making likely to be? And what is it to deal with the problems successfully?

In dealing with these questions, we shall critically consider people's attitudes toward technology, the environment, themselves, and others, as well as central beliefs and presuppositions connected with these attitudes. We shall try to determine their role, if any, in generating moral problems in technology, setting up constraints for their resolution, and helping address the problems. We shall also seek to establish whether the attitudes examined are significantly associated with any practices or institutions, and whether any of the beliefs and presuppositions they involve are false. And we shall take a brief look at such things as the philosophical and religious sources of the said attitudes, and the history of practices and institutions which appear to be significantly associated with them. Our emphasis, however, will be on policies, and we will especially focus on current political and economic circumstances, which often have a dominant role in creating moral problems in technology and setting limits to the policies capable of addressing them both effectively and tolerably. The upshot of all this should be a basic approach for establishing morally sound technology policies. Establishing morally sound technology policies and developing an approach for establishing them calls for intelligent experience, careful discussion and research, and hard thinking. We will try to do all these things. There will be readings on what has been said on various sides of various technological matters of controversy, in class discussion of these readings, and critical examination of hypotheses for resolving the problems that arise in the controversies. Each student will be required to write two papers and a final, and to present a research report to the whole class, in writing or orally, on a topic relevant to the course

The Final: This will be a take-home piece of work emphasizing the topics discussed in class. Students will have about a week to write it.

The Papers: These will be pieces of work reflecting the student's careful research and independent thinking. (Make sure you are aware of the university's policies on plagiarism.) In order for a paper to receive a passing grade, the student submitting it must have submitted a first draft and a final version of the paper proposal by the proposal's deadlines stated below, and the final version of the proposal must have been approved in writingit should say "go ahead" and be signedby the instructor.

The Proposals: All proposals must include the following six items:

ù A topic, that is, what the paper will be about.

ù The main questions the student intends to address about this topic.

ù Any hunches or definite views the student may have about what the paper's conclusion will turn out to be

ù A rough outline of the reasoning leading to this conclusion. ù A list of specialized articles, books, or other sources relevant to the topic. Make sure to include full citations.

The Report to the Class: This piece of work may take a variety of forms. It may be in writing (say, an annotated bibliography on a matter of technology controversy), or it may be oral (say, leading a class discussion about a previously shown film or videotape which addressed some moral problems in technology). Report-topics may, but need not overlap with paper topics. Students are also required to consult with the instructor about their proposed reports. In the case of oral reports, this should be planned early enough to facilitate the presentation's scheduling.

1¾«*//1224@ Ð4/µPhilosophy 346: Ethical Theory Page
Iannone

Philosophy 346: Ethical Theory Page
Iannone

PHILOSOPHY 346 ETHICAL THEORY Iannone

So far as morals go, there probably has never been an age quite so perplexed and torn by discord as the present one, or so little disposed to be submissive to the admonition of the good and great; and the reason is that for large numbers of people the things valued in the past have lost their motive power, and no one seems to know just how to work to replace them.

A. K. Rogers, Ethics and Moral Tolerance (New York: McMillan, 1934), pp. 2-3

These remarks are as relevant today as when Rogers made them and will provide part of the motivation for this course. We will begin by examining a variety of matters of discorde.g., race relations; health care systems; genetic engineering; environmental deteriorationand will ask: Do these matters. or does the discord there is about them, pose any moral problems? What are they? What, in general, characterizes moral Problems? Are there kinds of moral problems? What are they? Are they different from moral issues? How? What theories have been formulated for addressing moral problems and issues? Which ones are better and why?

A successful inquiry along the above lines requires intelligent experience, careful discussion and research, and hard thinking. We will try to do all these things. There will be weekly readings about specific moral theories, in class discussion of these readings, and critical examination of hypotheses for resolving moral problems and issues.

The Final: This will be a take-home piece of work emphasizing the topics discussed in class. Students will have about a week to write it.

The Proposals: Preparing a proposal involves the following four main steps:

first, choose a topic that is philosophically relevant and that also interests you. You may use the materials in the books for the course to select one;

second, to make sure you are on the right track, check with your instructor before proceeding;

third, after your instructor approves your topic, use the Selected Bibliography at the end of the book, or any resources your instructor may suggest, to prepare a short list of philosophical readings that you intend to use in writing your paper;

fourth, read these materials and, on the basis of the information thus acquired, write a proposal.

Proposals should be one to two pages long and include:

first, a topic, that is, what the paper will be about;

then, the main question(s) the student intends to address about this topic; next, any hunch(es) or definite view(s) the student may have about what the paper's conclusion will turn out to be;

finally, a rough abstract of the reasoning leading to this conclusion.

They should be accompanied by the list of readings you intend to use in writing the paper.

The Report to the Class.

This piece of work may take a variety of forms. It may be in writing (say, an annotated bibliography on a moral matter of controversy), or it may be oral (say, leading a class discussion about a previously shown film or videotape which addressed some moral problems). Report-topics may, but need not overlap with paper topics. Students are also required to consult with the instructor about their proposed reports. In the case of oral reports, this should be planned early enough to facilitate the presentation's scheduling.

Iannone

Philosophy 220: Introduction to Logic Page

Iannone

PHILOSOPHY 220 INTRODUCTION TO LOGIC Iannone

Thinking well, like singing well, is not something which most of us, humans, can readily do. Indeed, it takes a great deal of practice and reflection for us to develop the ability to think well. This course will provide conditions conducive to such practice and reflection in an attempt at helping students become significantly better thinkers at the end of the course than they were at the beginning. The course will accordingly emphasize the practice of good thinking, which is nothing but the practice of logic, and the reflection which such practice requires. This will include a reflection about the functions, boundaries, types, and standards of good thinking about ordinarysay, political and moral matters, and about matters of scientific interest.

We will begin by considering various examples of bad thinking. Absurdities of different sorts (there are plenty of them) will provide us with ample room for reflection and humor. Through seeing what is funny about them, we will learn to deal with them in various ways. We will for example learn to question questions of certain sorts rather than try to answer them. We will also learn to deal with statements and pieces of reasoning affected by ambiguities, vagueness, equivocations, and other pitfalls. By contrast with these questions, statements, and pieces of reasoning, we will attempt to characterize others which are free from pitfalls.

In the process of discussing the said questions, statements, and pieces of reasoning, we will ask: What is a statement? What is an argument? What is a deductive argument? What is an inductive one? Are there arguments which are neither deductive nor inductive? If so, what are they? What is a valid deductive argument? And a sound one? What is a self-refuting statement? And a self-defeating position? What standards should be used in establishing whether it is reasonable to believe something? What sorts of pitfalls are likely to be involved in people's non-deductive thinking and how might they be avoided? What is it "to lie with statistics"? What is it to use statistics in a reasonable way? How does one's choice of definitions affects one's evaluations of arguments and beliefs, and what can justifiably be done about it? Dealing with these questions should help students develop their skills at analyzing, evaluating and, when appropriate, criticizing their own thinking and that of others. It should also provide a sufficiently solid background for the main task of the course: to develop a very elementary modern approach for distinguishing good from bad reasoning.

A successful inquiry into these matters requires intelligent experience, careful discussion and research, and hard thinking. We will try to do all these things. There will be readings discussing examples of good and bad thinking, in class discussions of these readings, as well as of examples provided by the teacher or the students.

Each student will be required to take three examinations and will have to pass the final in order to pass the course.

1¾«ƒ/335668@ Ð83µPhilosophy 112: Introduction to Philosophy Page

Iannone

Philosophy 112: Introduction to Philosophy Page

Iannone

Philosophy 112 INTRODUCTION TO PHILOSOPHY Iannone

Philosophy is often a source of puzzlement. And puzzlement sometimes is a first step into philosophy. Even the most familiar situations provide occasion to puzzle. In this course, we will try to make good use of such occasion. We will begin by considering how philosophy began in the Western world and beyond, how it came to be considered, and some of the logical tools it uses to deal with philosophical puzzlements. In discussing these tools, we will pay some attention to nonsense. Absurdities of different sorts (there are plenty of them) will provide us with ample room for puzzlement and humor. Through seeing what is funny about them, we will learn to deal with them in various ways. We will for example learn to question questions of certain sorts rather than try to answer them. And learning this should be of help when we later proceed to deal with philosophical problems concerning knowledge, faith, freedom, personhood, morality, and art. In dealing with these problems, we will ask: What is knowledge? What is belief? What is doubt? Can we know anything? What and how? What is science? Can it help solve any philosophical problems? What is truth? Is it relative? Are we ever entitled to believe as we please? Can we ever freely choose how to act? Or is everything we do always fated to be, or always caused by forces beyond our control? And if it is, can we be justifiably held responsible for anything we do? What is it to be ourselves? What is it to be a person? Is there a difference between right and wrong, good, and bad, justified and unjustified? What is involved in justifying something? What is a work of art? Can its value ever be justified or is it always arbitrary? In any case, what would it be to resolve the problems formulated by these questions?

In trying to deal with the problems posed by these and related questions, we may not reach conclusions. However, if we learn how to deal with them, we will have attained some results and, perhaps, a little bit of wisdom, whose attainment is said to be an aim of philosophy. A successful inquiry along the above lines requires intelligent experience, careful discussion and research, and hard thinking. We will try to do all these things. There will be readings about specific philosophical problems, in class discussion of these readings, and critical examination of hypotheses for resolving the problems.

Each student will be required to take a midterm and a final, and to write a paper to be submitted towards the end of the course.

The Midterm: This will take place soon after the first part of the course. It will emphasize the topics discussed in class up to that point. Students will have one class period to write it. Each student will be required to answer two essay questions out of a choice of four.

The Paper: This will be a piece of work reflecting the student's careful research and independent thinking. (Make sure you are aware of the university's policies on plagiarism). In order for the paper to receive a passing grade, the student submitting it must have submitted a first draft and a final version of the paper proposal by the proposal's deadlines stated below, and the final version of the proposal must have been approved in writing and signed by the instructor.

The Proposal: Preparing a proposal involves the following four main steps:

first, choose a topic that is philosophically relevant and that also interests you. You may use the materials in the philosophy books for the course to select one;

second, to make sure you are on the right track, check with your instructor before proceeding;

fourth, read these materials and, on the basis of the information thus acquired, write a proposal.

Proposals should be one to two pages long and include the following five items:

first, a topic, that is, what the paper will be about; then, the main question(s) the student intends to address about this topic;

next, any hunch(es) or definite view(s) the student may have about what the paper's conclusion will turn out to be;

also, a rough abstract of the reasoning leading to this conclusion.

finally, a list of readings you intend to use in writing the paper

Developing a paper proposal usually takes a great deal of work and various meetings with the instructor to take care of a variety of details affecting the viability of the proposed paper. It is accordingly best for students to start working on a proposal for their first paper as soon as possible. This way, there will be no surprises at proposal submission time and students will be able to meet the paper submission deadline.

The Final: This will emphasize the topics discussed in class. Each student will be required to answer two essay questions out of a choice of four.

1¾«æ066788:@Ð:6µPhilosophy 121: Introduction to Philosophy through Literature Page

Iannone

Philosophy 121: Introduction to Philosophy through Literature Page

Iannone

PHILOSOPHY 121 INTRODUCTION TO PHILOSOPHY Iannone

THROUGH LITERATURE

Some works of literature_e.g., Fyodor Dostoevsky's The Brothers Karamazov, Joseph Conrad's Lord Jim, and the works of the Latin American writer Jorge Luis Borges_have been described as "philosophical." What does such description mean? Is it justified? In this course, we will explore these and related questions while reading primarily works of narrative by such authors as Borges, and Dostoevsky, as well as a few published or award-winning pieces by the teacher of this course.

In the process, we will address such topics as the nature of literature; its relation to art; the differences between poetry, narrative, and such forms of drama as comedy and tragedy; the relations of these to life; the nature and grounds of philosophical ideas involved in literary works; the role of criticism in literature; the nature of literary understanding; the locus of interpretation in literature (text, author, critics, reader); and the identity of a work of literature.

We will also compare, contrast and evaluate various conceptions of the relations between literature and philosophy, among them, literature in philosophy, i.e., the inquiry aimed at placing literature in the context of a given philosophy; philosophy in literature, i.e., the study of ideas of philosophical interest found in literary works; philosophy through literature, i.e., philosophical inquiry pursued through literary works; and philosophy and literature, i.e., an inquiry in which philosophy and literature are taken to be distinct and self-guided activities that, nonetheless, relate to each other in various ways.

These conceptions involve differing relations between philosophical and literary discourse which prompt philosophical as well as literary inquiry about additional topics we will explore: the role of fiction in exploring fact; the place, if any, of truth in fiction; and the tensions between fiction, memory, and personal and cultural identity especially as these manifest themselves in the literature of exile.

Carrying out the preceding tasks calls for intelligent experience, careful discussion and research, and hard thinking. We will try to do all these things. There will be readings of works of narrative, class discussion of these readings, and critical examination of hypotheses for resolving the literary and philosophical problems posed the readings.

Each student will be required to take a midterm and a final, and to write a paper to be submitted towards the end of the course.

The Midterm: This will take place soon after the sixth week of classes. It will emphasize the topics discussed in class up to that point. Students will have one class period to write it. Each student will be required to answer two essay questions out of a choice of four.

The Proposal: Preparing a proposal involves the following four main steps:

first, choose a topic that is philosophically relevant and that also interests you. You may use the materials in the philosophy books for the course to select one;

second, to make sure you are on the right track, check with your instructor before proceeding;

fourth, read these materials and, on the basis of the information thus acquired, write a proposal.

Proposals should be one to two pages long and include the following five items:

first, a topic, that is, what the paper will be about;

then, the main question(s) the student intends to address about this topic; next, any hunch(es) or definite view(s) the student may have about what the paper's conclusion will turn out to be;

also, a rough abstract of the reasoning leading to this conclusion.

finally, a list of readings you intend to use in writing the paper

Developing a paper proposal usually takes a great deal of work and various meetings with the instructor to take care of a variety of details affecting the viability of the proposed paper. It is accordingly best for students to start working on a proposal for their paper as soon as possible. This way, there will be no surprises at proposal submission time and students will be able to meet the paper submission deadline.

The Final: This will emphasize the topics discussed in class. Each student will be required to answer two essay questions out of a choice of four.

1¾«„5;;=>>@@ Ð@;µPhilosophy 400: Philosophy as Diplomacy Page

Iannone

Philosophy 400: Philosophy as Diplomacy Page

Iannone

PHILOSOPHY 400 PHILOSOPHY AS DIPLOMACY Iannone

It has been said that life is like a foreign language: Everyone mispronounces it. The analogy tellingly applies to policy-making. It obviously applies when different societies or cultures are involved, but it also applies within comparatively homogeneous cultures or social groups, say, within the United States and Western Europe scientific and policy making communities. That it does is evidenced by the lack of integration between the languages, concepts, methods, and practices of the branches of inquiry and the institutions relevant to policy-making. These include political science, sociology, economics, technology and business studies, and philosophy, as well as the academic institutions connected with them. The fragmentation, however, reaches outside academia, to the relations between the studies and academic institutions on the one hand and governmental institutions on the other.

This course will deal with this fragmentation as displayed in policy studies and as it affects politically sound and morally sensitive policy-making. We will ask: Can rational choice, decision, social choice, and game theory help deal with policy making problems and issues? What, if any, are their shortcomings? Do any other theories appear more plausible? Which ones and why? Can any predominant approaches in ethics and socio-political philosophy--say, utilitarian, or rights-based approaches--help deal with policy making problems? How well? Do any other approaches seem more plausible? Which ones and why? The upshot of our discussions should be a basic framework for establishing morally sound policies and making morally justified decisions in dealing with policy-making problems and issues.

A successful inquiry along the above lines requires intelligent experience, careful discussion and research, and hard thinking. We will try to do all these things. There will be weekly readings about specific policy-making matters such as the concepts of preference, need, and their policy-making role; the economic approach to human behavior; and the policy-assessment and policy making suitability of consequentialist, deontological, pragmatic, and other ethical theories and their political theory counterparts.

The course will be structured as a seminar, meeting once a week for two hours and a half, with a ten-minute break in between. In accordance with this seminar structure, students will take turns to write shortsix- to eight-pages longpapers intended to promote discussion on the weekly readings. Each week, two such papers will be read and discussed in connection with the readings they addressone during the first half of the seminar meeting, the other during the second. In addition to matters of textual interpretation, the discussions should include a critical examination of hypotheses for resolving practical and theoretical problems formulated in the papers or the readings. Seminars are as good or bad as its members make them. Hence, to make this seminar as good as we can, all students in it will be expected to have carefully done the readings assigned for each week, and to have prepared critical questions of their own.

All in all, each student will be required to write at least four short papers for purposes of encouraging class discussion, one term paper to be read to the class (preceded by a proposal which must be approved by the instructor), and a research report on the sources used in researching his or her paper so that the whole class can use it as reference for future research. Students will have to receive a passing grade on their term paper in order to pass the course.

The Short Papers: These will be pieces of work reflecting the student's careful research and independent thinking on the scheduled readings. They should be submitted to the instructor for grading purposes after having been presented to the class.

The Term Papers: These will be pieces of work reflecting the student's careful research and independent thinking. (Make sure you are aware of the university's policies on plagiarism.) In order for a paper to receive a passing grade, the student submitting it must have submitted a first draft and a final version of the paper proposal by the proposal's deadlines stated below, and the final version of the proposal must have been approved in writingit should say "go ahead" and be signedby the instructor.

The Proposals: All proposals must include the following six items:

¨ A topic, that is, what the paper will be about.

¨ The main questions the student intends to address about this topic.

¨ Any hunches or definite views the student may have about what the paper's conclusion will turn out to be

¨ A rough outline of the reasoning leading to this conclusion.

¨ A list of specialized articles, books, or other sources relevant to the topic. Make sure to include full citations.

PHILOSOPHY 335 PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE Iannone

The philosophy of science characteristically deals with general questions about science or scientific concepts. Examples of these questions are: What is science?, What is a scientific theory?, What is a law of nature?, What is the role of predictions in confirming a theory or a law of nature?, and Is history a science? By contrast, the sciences primarily, if not exclusively, deal with more specific questions. Examples are: Does the currently accepted formulation of the law of gravity need modification?, Are the speeds of space-probes leaving the solar system affected by the presence of dark matter in the solar system?, When was the ozone layer discovered?, Is the rat-squirrel extinct?, and Is Pluto a planet? Scientific methods help find answers to these latter, more specific questions, but do not—or cannot—help find answers to the former, highly general ones. This distinction raises yet further questions—Is the difference in degree of generality just described a crucial, or merely a circumstantial difference between science and the philosophy of science? Do science and the philosophy of science, though separate at lower levels of inquiry, converge as the inquiry becomes more general? Do they ever converge at specific or even particular levels? Do they ever merge?

In this course, we shall critically examine these and related questions. We shall use examples from physics, astronomy, biology, psychology, sociology, linguistics, history, and economics, and spend time discussing such things as observation, measurement, explanation, laws of nature, scientific models, scientific theories, and values and objectivity in science.

A successful inquiry along the above lines requires intelligent experience, careful discussion and research, and hard thinking. We will try to do all these things. There will be weekly readings about specific topics, in class discussion of these readings, and critical examination of hypotheses for resolving problems about the topics.

The Final: This will be a take-home piece of work emphasizing the topics discussed in class. Students will have about a week to write it.

The Papers: These will be pieces of work reflecting the student's careful research and independent thinking. (Make sure you are aware of the university's policies on plagiarism.) In order for a paper to receive a passing grade, the student submitting it must have submitted a first draft and a final version of the paper proposal by the proposal’s deadlines stated below, and the final version of the proposal must have been approved in writing—i.e., it should say "go ahead" and be signed—by the instructor.

The Proposals: Preparing a proposal involves the following four main steps:

first, choose a topic that is philosophically relevant and that also interests you. You may use the materials in the books for the course to select one;

second, to make sure you are on the right track, check with your instructor before proceeding;

third, after your instructor approves your topic, use the Bibliography at the end of the book and references at the end of the book's selections, or any resources your instructor may suggest, to prepare a short list of philosophical readings that you intend to use in writing your paper;

fourth, read these materials and, on the basis of the information thus acquired, write a proposal.

Proposals should be one to two pages long and include:

first, a topic, that is, what the paper will be about;

then, the main question(s) the student intends to address about this topic; next, any hunch(es) or definite view(s) the student may have about what the paper's conclusion will turn out to be;

finally, a rough abstract of the reasoning leading to this conclusion.

They should be accompanied by the list of readings you intend to use in writing the paper

The Report to the Class: This piece of work may take a variety of forms. It may be in writing (say, an annotated bibliography on a matter of concern in science and philosophy), or it may be oral (say, leading a class discussion about a previously shown film or videotape which addressed some problems of philosophical interest in or about science). Report-topics may, but need not overlap with paper topics. Students are also required to consult with the instructor about their proposed reports. In the case of oral reports, this should be planned early enough to facilitate the presentation's scheduling.

PHILOSOPHY 235 PHILOSOPHY OF SOCIAL SCIENCE Iannone

Some philosophers of science, especially those of the logical‑empiricist tradition, hold that the social sciences are not sciences at all. In defense of this view, these philosophers appeal to certain accounts of scientific explanation and theory construction, and argue that the social sciences do not satisfy the criteria set down by these accounts.

Various positions have been advanced against the latter. These either take the form of arguing that the social sciences are essentially different from the natural sciences and should not be straight‑jacketed by the methodology of the latter, or take the form of arguing that the accounts of scientific explanation and theory construction appealed to by those who hold that the social sciences are not sciences at all, are inadequate both for the social sciences and for the natural sciences.

In this course, we shall critically examine all these positions, as well as traditional and more recent accounts of explanation, and of the structure of scientific theories. We shall also ask whether the grounds for determining which of the said positions are adequate should be actual patterns of explanation and the actual structures of theories or, alternatively, ideal conceptions of explanation and theory-structure.

We shall use examples from psychology, sociology, linguistics, history, and economics, and spend time discussing such things as laws, observation, measurement, and values in science, and the nature of human action. Later on in the course, we shall focus on intentional behavior and try to determine whether the fact that many theories in the social studies are about human behavior has any bearing on the structure of these theories. In this connection, the so called 'prediction paradox' and the question of whether the social sciences can be objective will be discussed at some length.

A successful inquiry along the above lines requires intelligent experience, careful discussion and research, and hard thinking. We will try to do all these things. There will be weekly readings about specific topics, in class discussion of these readings, and critical examination of hypotheses for resolving problems about the topics.

The Final: This will be a take-home piece of work emphasizing the topics discussed in class. Students will have about a week to write it.

The Papers: These will be pieces of work reflecting the student's careful research and independent thinking. (Make sure you are aware of the university's policies on plagiarism.) In order for a paper to receive a passing grade, the student submitting it must have submitted a first draft and a final version of the paper proposal by the proposal’s deadlines stated below, and the final version of the proposal must have been approved in writing and signed by the instructor.

The Proposals: Preparing a proposal involves the following four main steps:

first, choose a topic that is philosophically relevant and that also interests you. You may use the materials in the books for the course to select one;

second, to make sure you are on the right track, check with your instructor before proceeding;

fourth, read these materials and, on the basis of the information thus acquired, write a proposal.

Proposals should be one to two pages long and include:

first, a topic, that is, what the paper will be about;

then, the main question(s) the student intends to address about this topic; next, any hunch(es) or definite view(s) the student may have about what the paper's conclusion will turn out to be;

finally, a rough abstract of the reasoning leading to this conclusion.

They should be accompanied by the list of readings you intend to use in writing the paper