Fall 2008 Courses
101-1 Introduction to Philosophy11:00-12:15 TR
Gibson
The aim of this course is to introduce the student to philosophy. We will study some different areas in philosophy and the problems and questions addressed in those areas. But we will also study how philosophers go about answering these questions - what kinds of arguments they give, what reasons led them to their views. And we will evaluate whether their arguments are good ones. These are the different areas of philosophy that we will study: Epistemology or the theory of knowledge which is concerned with questions about the nature and extent of knowledge; Philosophy of Religion, where we will understand and evaluate arguments that try to prove God exists; Ethics, where we will be concerned with whether there really is such a thing as right or wrong, and if so, what makes something right or wrong; and finally, in the last section of the course, we will examine whether it makes sense to think that human beings have Free Will if their behavior is a part of the natural, causal order. Assignments will include both take-home and in-class essay exams.
101-2 Introduction to Philosophy
9:30-10:45 TR
Sidelle
Philosophy is both an area, with its own questions and history of discussion of these questions - What is knowledge? What goes into making an action right or wrong? What is it to live a happy (good/worthwhile) life? What is it to act rationally? Can we ever be responsible for our behavior? What is it for a sign to have meaning? Is having a mind the same thing as having a brain? - as well as a certain critical way of looking at things, approaching issues, clarifying concepts, and evaluating positions and arguments. The methods philosophers use in generating and conducting investigation in their own particular subject matter, as well as many of the issues philosophers concern themselves with, can be relevant to all sorts of subject matters, which are not, of themselves, particularly philosophical. Drawing distinctions, identifying underlying assumptions, generating puzzles, coming up with arguments and evaluating them, seeing what a disagreement is really about, distinguishing the letter from the spirit of positions, are among the many tools of philosophy, which can be used in other areas not only in critical evaluation, but in seeing possible issues and questions to raise. In this course, we will look at some quite general and fundamental philosophical issues, as well as some that are more particular, such as the rationality of emotions. We will be particularly concerned to bring out various sorts of philosophical tools and distinctions which are relevant not only to philosophy, but to philosophical reflection or consideration about other areas, and also to see how philosophical assumptions or claims may be present even when one is not 'doing philosophy'.
101-4 Introduction to Philosophy
1:00-2:15 TR
Staff
No Description available.
101-5 Introduction to Philosophy
9:55 MWF
Shapiro
The purpose of this course
is to introduce students to philosophical questions and to the kind
of thinking that philosophers use to address these questions.
Philosophical questions are peculiar: unlike scientific questions, their
solution typically does not depend on the collection of empirical data;
unlike mathematical questions, there are no formulae that are guaranteed
to produce a correct answer to them. An adequate answer to a philosophical
question requires an argument, and so it is upon arguments that we will
focus in this course. We will consider philosophical questions,
such as “What should a just society look like?”, “What, if anything,
can we know about the world?”, “Are minds physical?”, and “What
reasons, if any, are there to believe that God exists?”. We
will examine some classical answers to these questions and will try
to devise answers of our own. There will be three short papers,
two exams, and mandatory class attendance.
101-6 Introduction to Philosophy
11:00 MWF
Comesana
This course will be an introduction
to some of the main problems of philosophy, some of the proposed solutions
to those problems, and the arguments that philosophers have advanced
in defense of those solutions. Topics covered will include: epistemology
(do you know that you are not inside The Matrix?); ethics (is there
a single true morality?; are you morally required to donate $100 to
charity this term?); metaphysics (how is the mind related to the body?;
if a person's actions are determined by the antecedent physical state
of world, are those actions free?). Readings will include both classical
and contemporary sources.
104-1 Good, Beauty &
the Meaning of Life
9:55 MWF
Nadler
No Description available
210-1 Reason in Communication
11:00-12:15 TR
Forster
This course is about critical
thinking. Some forms of reasoning are more persuasive than others, but
many persuasive forms of reasoning are fallacious. We will critically
examine various patterns of reasoning (arguments) commonly used in newspaper
editorials, political speeches, classrooms, courtrooms, and advertisements
with the aim of discerning the difference between good and bad reasoning.
This skill in critical thinking may also improve your argumentative
writing. This is not a course in formal, or symbolic logic like 211
although there will be some very elementary symbolic logic. We will
look at simple examples of causal and statistical reasoning as well.
For more information, browse through the required text: Critical thinking,
6th edition, by B.N. Moore and R. Parker, Mayfield Publishing Company.
210-3 Reason in Communication
11:00 MWF
Staff
No Description available.
211-1 Elementary Logic
9:30-10:45 TR
Rauti
This course provides an introduction
to formal logic. We will study two formal languages and their interpretations.
We will then introduce deduction systems for the two languages, i.e.
formal rules for deriving conclusions from premises. Our goal is to
characterize valid and invalid arguments and understand the notion of
logical consequence.
211-2 Elementary Logic
11:00 MWF
Vranas
A hotel manager put up a sign
reading: "No one is permitted on these premises unless accompanied
by a registered guest". Apparently the manager failed to realize
that from the statement on the sign it follows that no unaccompanied
registered guest is permitted on the premises! In general, the question
of which statements follow from other statements is quite tricky. This
course addresses this tricky question by (1) introducing a symbolic
language into which one can translate a great many ordinary English
sentences and almost all mathematical sentences, and by (2) using an
automated proof procedure to show that certain sentences follow from
other sentences.
211-3 Elementary Logic
9:55 MWF
Staff
No Description available.
241-1 Introductory Ethics
(Satisfies Category B requirement)
1:00-2:15 TR
Staff
No Description available
241-2 Introductory Ethics
11:00-12:15 TR
Sartorio
This course is an examination
of some of the central topics in moral philosophy. We will identify
possible reasons for holding certain views, which philosophers reconstruct
in the form of arguments, and we will critically assess those reasons.
We will start by considering particular moral issues, such as the debate
over the permissibility of abortion and euthanasia. Then we will consider
more general issues about morality, including two classical examples
of moral theories, the question of whether moral responsibility is compatible
with determinism, and the debate over the objectivity or relativity
of morality.
241-3 Introductory Ethics
(Satisfies Category B requirement)
11:00 MWF
Staff
No Description available
253 Philosophy of the Arts
(Satisfies Category B requirement)
12:05 MWF
Anderson
This course investigates a
set of basic questions about the nature of art: What is art? Can it
be defined? If not, why not? In addition, we will investigate a related
set of questions concerning the nature of aesthetic appreciation: Is
art appreciation merely a matter of taste? Or, is there some objectivity
involved in matters of aesthetic judgment? We will read the works of
important historical figures such as Plato, Tolstoy, Hume, Collingwood
and Bell as well as the work of some contemporary philosophers. There
will be two short papers, a midterm exam, and a final exam.
261 Introduction to the
Philosophy of Religion
9:55 MWF
Yandell
In a lecture-discussion format,
we will consider the following questions: (i) what properties is God
supposed to have, and can anything have them? (ii) what arguments are
there for the existence of God, and how should they be assessed? (iii)
what arguments are there against the existence of God, and how should
they be assessed? - here we will be most concerned about arguments from
evil (iv) is divine foreknowledge compatible with human freedom? (v)
what view of being a person best fits monotheistic religion, what competing
views are there, and how should these competing views be assessed? There
will be two in-class essay exams during the semester taken from study
questions passed out in advance, and a final exam held kat the time
the timetable indicates, also taken from study questions passed out
in advance.
341-1 Contemporary Moral
Issues
9:30-10:45 TR
Staff
No Description available.
(W)341-2 Contemporary Moral
Issues
1:20 MWF
Hausman
This writing-intensive course
will focus on four contemporary moral issues: surrogate motherhood,
abortion, capital punishment, and affirmative action. In addition, it
will introduce students to some moral theory to help address the issues.
The emphasis in the course will be on developing student's abilities
to formulate and criticize arguments so as to be able to make up their
minds rationally. In addition to examinations and homework, there will
be two essays, the second of which may be revised and resubmitted.
341-3 Contemporary Moral
Issues
12:05 MWF
Hunt
When are we justified in forcing
people to do things that they might not want to do? In the first five
weeks of this course, we will critically examine several "liberty-limiting
principles"-ideas which, if they are true, will tell us when it
is right to use force. during the remainder of the course, we will apply
these principles to contemporary issues in which the use of coercion
is involved, including: abortion, gun ownership, legalizing drugs, the
redistribution of wealth, and censoring hate speech. The point of the
course will be to help the student to do his or her own thinking on
these issues.
341-91 Contemporary Moral
Issues
9:55 M-R
Staff
341-92 Contemporary Moral
Issues
11:00 M-R
Staff
341-93 Contemporary Moral
Issues
12:05 M-R
341-94 Contemporary Moral
Issues
9:55 M-R
341-95 Contemporary Moral
Issues
11:00 M-R
341-96 Contemporary Moral
Issues
12:05 M-R
430 History of Ancient Philosophy
9:55 MWF
Gottlieb
Metaphysics and Epistemology
in Ancient Greek Philosophy
We’ll
be studying in depth, and with close attention to the texts, ancient
Greek philosophers’ attempts to answer the following questions:
What sorts of things are there in the world? Is a world of change
consistent with a world of substances? What would be a satisfactory
account of unity and diversity? What sort of knowledge, if any, can
we have of the world in which we live? Why are reason and logic
important? Why become a philosopher, and what’s the difference
between the philosopher and the sophist?
There
will be three tutorials.
432 History of Modern Philosophy
1:00-2:15 TR
Gibson
In the 17th and 18th centuries,
there were an unusual number of very important and influential philosophers.
In this course, we will focus on the Empiricist philosophers Locke,
Berkeley, and Hume; the Rationalist philosophers Descartes, Spinoza,
and Leibniz; and finally on Immanual Kant. We will read primary texts
and will be studying such metaphysical issues as the nature of substance,
the will, knowledge, causality, perception, and truth. Because of the
number of important philosophers in this period, the course will be
demanding and involve a lot of reading and writing. There will be take-home
essay exams which require the student to study, analyze, and criticize
the philosopher’s arguments.
440 French Philosophy-Existentialism
1:00-2:15 TR
Soll
In this course we shall study
two of the major figures of French Existentialism, Albert Camus and
Jean-Paul Sartre, whose theoretical work is considerably more voluminous,
complex and sophisticated.
We shall begin with a stylistic
and philosophic consideration of Camus’s novel, The Stranger followed
by a critical analysis of his essay The Myth of Sisyphus. We shall
then read Sartre’s story, The Wall, and his novel Nausea, before moving
to his theoretical works, The Transcendence of the Ego, the Emotions,
and Being and Nothingness. We shall deal with this deal with this
last work only in part, because it is very long and difficult.
Among the problems and concepts
we shall discuss are: the nature of “existentialism,” “alienation,”
“authenticity”, “the absurd,” the irrationality and ineffability
of existence, the feeling of “nausea” on is supposed to have as
one becomes aware of the gratuitous nature of one’s own existence,
the impossibility of real or satisfactory knowledge, the nature of consciousness,
self-deception, the emotions, the nature of an individuals identity,
freedom and the unwelcome responsibility it entails, the possibility
or impossibility of unconscious mental processes, and “existential
psychoanalysis.” There will be two short papers, an exam, and
a final paper or examination. Two 75 minute lectures and one discussion
section per week. A critical and philosophical evaluation of the
works read will be both encouraged and required.
454-1 Plato on Love
2:25 MWF
Gottlieb
The
opening scene of Plato’s Lysis shows Hippothales head over
heels in love, but he has a problem. How can he get his beloved
to love him in return? To answer this question, he enlists the
help of a lover of wisdom, the philosopher Socrates, who turns the discussion
in a different direction, to find out the true object of desire.
In the Symposium, Plato mixes tragedy with comedy to answer the
same question, but from a different angle. Finally, in his
Phaedrus, Plato makes fun of the way in which politicians want everyone
to love them, and presents a new view about what love really is.
We’ll
read all three texts in translation, and we’ll also look at passages
from Plato’s other works, when appropriate. While we’ll be
concentrating on the ethical side of the dialogues, we’ll also cover
topics in metaphysics, epistemology, psychology, aesthetics and political
philosophy. There will be tutorials.
454-2 Classical Philosophers:
Nietzsche
2:25 MWF
Hunt
This course will be a careful
reading and discussion of the major works of Nietzsche. Texts read will
come from every period of his productive life, and on all the major
topics on which he wrote, with emphasis on the mature works of the 1880s
and on topics having to do with value (ethical, political, and artistic).
From time to time short essays by other authors will be assigned, either
because they are criticizing/interpreting Nietzsche, or because they
are setting out a position that contrasts with that of Nietzsche in
some interesting way. We will also read some essays by Emerson because
he seems in some ways to have had a strong influence on Nietzsche. The
ultimate goal of everything we do will be to understand what Nietzsche
was saying and to form well-grounded opinions as to the merits of what
he was saying. Work for the course will include two papers and a final
exam.
481 Epistemology of Disagreement
1:20 MWF
Comesana
See 504 for description.
482 Junior Honors Seminar:
Philosophy of Language
11:00-12:15 TR
Rauti
See 516 for description.
501 Philosophy of Religion
(Satisfies Category A requirement)
11:00 MWF
Yandell
Each discipline has its highly
influential figures. Aquinas, Hume, and Kant have been enormously influential
in the philosophy of religion. In a lecture-discussion format, we will
look these three figures. In each case, we will study their actual views,
and look at some of the contemporary influence these views have, what
reasons can be given for thinking that these views (of Aquinas, Hume,
and Kant, and their contemporary versions) are true, and what reasons
can be given for thinking that they are false. Briefly: Thomas Aquinas
attempted to take portions of Classical Greek thought (Plato, Aristotle,
Plotinus) and baptize it into a theology that was philosophically defensible.
Put another way: he give (in particular)Aristotle=s conceptual system
a recasting as a version of monotheism. A famous slogan associated with
his endeavor is All our concepts are abstracted from sensory experience.
David Hume attempted to take portions of Ancient Skepticism and the
Empiricism of his predecessors (suitably recast) and relentlessly drew
secular conclusions from them. He is viewed as being the only really
consistent Empiricist among his colleagues in the history of Modern
philosophy. A famous slogan associated with his endeavor is All our
knowledge derives from sensory experience. Immanuel Kant said he wanted
to restrict reason in order to make room for faith, but he used both
reason and faith in technical sense defined from within his own perspective.
His philosophy of religion is commonly viewed as the most sophisticated
attempt ever to reduce religion to morality, though this reading of
Kant is disputed. A famous slogan associated with his endeavor is Even
though all our cognition starts with experience, this does not mean
that all of it arises from experience. We will discuss, and considers
reasons for and against, the views that these authors, and their more
recent fans, have offered.
504 The Epistemology of
Disagreement
1:20 MWF
Comesana
Suppose that, after careful
reflection and consideration of all the available evidence, you make
up your mind and come to believe, say, that the death penalty should
be abolished. Suppose also that you talk about this issue with a friend
of yours who is just as smart,
intelligent, open-minded, diligent in the collection of evidence, etc.,
as you are. When someone is at least as good as you are with respect
to all of these epistemic virtues, let us say that you and this person
are ``epistemic peers'' of each other. The central question in the epistemology
of disagreement can be then put in this way: what should you do when
you find out that an epistemic peer disagrees with you?
In this course we will distinguish easier and harder versions of that question,
and study what has been said about the harder questions. The main alternatives
here are what we can call ``conciliatory'' views, according to which
we should defer, in some appropriate degree, to the views of our peer,
and ``stubborn'' views, according to which it's epistemically permissible
to retain our own view. Other issues to be discussed include: When should
we consider someone as an epistemic peer (or, more generally, as having
some degree of epistemic competence relative to us)? Are conciliatory
positions (positions according to which we should defer to the judgment
of epistemic peers)
especially prone to skepticism? Are they self-refuting? What is the role
of second-order evidence in these disputes?
The readings for this seminar will consist of contemporary sources.
516 Language and Meaning
(Satisfies Category A requirement)
11:00-12:15 TR
Rauti
This class will introduce you
to the philosophy of language in the analytic tradition. We are going
to start from Locke's imagist theory of meaning and discuss its inadequacy
by contemporary standards. This will lead to G. Frege's conception of
meaning, in particular his anti-psychologism, his distinction between
sense and reference, his ideas on how the meaning of complex expressions
depends on that of their parts. Next we will switch to B. Russell and
his views on the connection between language and the world. Our focus
will be on proper names and definite descriptions. We will develop our
discussion further by looking at contemporary literature on descriptions
(phrases like "The first man on the moon) and at current "direct
reference" theories of proper names (like "Aristotle").
We are also going to consider the pragmatic aspect of language, in particular
the ways in which we can do something by uttering certain words (we
say "I do" and we get married), and the ways in which we manage,
on some occasions, to imply something which is distinct from the literal
meaning of the words we utter (we say "well, it's midnight"
and we imply "it's time for you to leave").
522 Special Topicf: Philosophy of Probability
11:00-12:15 TR
Sober
Topics considered will probably include: the debate between frequentism and Bayesianism, the interpretation of probability, the role of probability in various philosophical arguments (Pascal's wager, the Design argument, Hume's skeptical argument about induction), Simpson's paradox, psychological experiments on how people reason about probability, and topic from decision theory (the
Newcomb paradox) and game theory (the prisoners' dilemma).
523 Philosophical Problems
of the Biological Sciences: Darwin and Darwinism
1:00-2:15 TR
Sober, Numbers
In this course we will read
substantial portions of Darwin's writings, as well as work by some of
Darwin's predecessors (Paley and Chambers) and some of the responses
in the 19th century to Darwin's theory. Questions in the philosophy
of science will be developed from these historical materials.
524 Philosophy and Economics
11:00 MWF
Hausman
This course will focus on questions
concerning the nature of rationality and decision making in both strategic
and non-strategic contexts and with questions concerning the moral appraisal
of economic outcomes, institutions, processes, and policies. Comparatively
little will be said about economic methodology. There will be
two papers (with an opportunity to revise the second) and exams.
545 Philosophical Conceptions
of Teaching & Learning
4:00-7:00 pm M
Pekarsky
No Description available.
560 Metaphysics
(Satisfies Category A requirement)
2:30-3:45 TR
Sartorio
In this course we will discuss
some of the central topics in metaphysics: the persistence of objects
through time, the persistence of people through time, the nature of
time itself, and free will. We will look at some paradoxes and
problems that arise regarding these topics, and we will examine how
different metaphysical views fare with respect to them.
571 Mathematical Logic
8:50 MWF
Miller
No Description available.
581 Senior Honors Seminar:
Metaphysics
2:30-3:45 TR
Sartorio
See 560 for description.
582 Senior Honors Seminar-Philosophy
of Economics
11:00 MWF
Hausman
See 524 for description.
916 Philosophy of Language
1:15-3:15 T
Sidelle
This seminar is designed to
provide basic background for philosophy graduate students on central
literature, issues and views in the philosophy of language, with particular
focus/interest on issues there that impinge upon, or are relevant to,
issues or claims in other areas of philosophy. We will look at
theories of meaning and reference, analyticity, rigid designation, the
distinction between pragmatics and semantics, propositional attitude
reports, two-dimensionalism, indexicals, and we’ll see what else
maybe some stuff on verbal disputes.
920 Whewell’s Philosophy
of Science
3:30-5:30 T
Forster
In the 1840’s, William Whewell
and John Stuart Mill disagreed about the nature of scientific knowledge,
and how knowledge grows. For Mill, innovative ideas and novel
conceptions are literally read from the observational facts. Thus,
in planetary astronomy, Kepler used ellipses in place of circles because
he saw the elliptical shape of Mars’s orbit from the new observational
data collected by Tycho Brahe. For Whewell, on the other hand,
new conceptions are introduced as conjectures of mind, and then tested
by their ability to unify disparate phenomena in a process he calls
the consilience of inductions. The consilience of inductions enables
us to separate the wheat from the chaff, and true from the false.
For Whewell, this historical progression of science teaches us how to
read the truth INITO our theories. Whewell’s theory of scientific
knowledge is importantly different from modern philosophies of science,
which follow in Mill’s direction, and subscribe to the view that scientific
knowledge is extracted by logical deduction FROM the best scientific
theory of the day. Whose view is right? Whewell’s, Mill’s,
neither, or both?
951 Embodied Cognition
1:15-3:15 M
Shapiro
In recent years embodied cognition has emerged as a challenger to the reigning computational conception of mind. Whether this challenge is serious depends on how one understands the commitments of the computational theory of mind and also on how one articulates the claims of embodied cognition. This seminar will spend the first few meetings discussing articles that have been foundational in defining the computational theory of mind (e.g., papers by Newell & Simon, Putnam, Fodor). The topic will then turn to embodied cognition. We will examine work by philosophers (e.g. Clark, Rowlands, Noë), psychologists (e.g. Glenberg, O'Regan, Gibson) and roboticists (e.g. Beer, Brooks) in an effort to isolate some core themes by which to characterize the aims and methods of embodied cognition. By semester's end, we should be in a good position to evaluate the nature of the embodied cognition challenge to computationalism.
960 Time Travel
1:15-3:15 W
Vranas
Welcome to the brave new world of time travel. It is a world in which you can be your own mother and father; a world in which you can witness your own death and yet go on living; and maybe also a world in which a great painting can exist without having been painted by anyone. Some people take these paradoxes to show that time travel is impossible. But contemporary physicists take time travel seriously, because it is allowed by many models of General Relativity.
This seminar examines (1) the physics, (2) the metaphysics, and (3) the paradoxes of time travel, using readings from physics, philosophy, and science fiction. The requirements consist of a term paper and weekly email objections to the readings. Further information, including the syllabus, is available at: http://mywebspace.wisc.edu