Philosophy

Instructor: Chris Dorst

This course is designed to familiarize incoming graduate students with the expectations and standards of graduate level work in philosophy. In particular, it aims to develop the tools necessary to read, write, and converse about philosophy at the graduate level. We will study and discuss a wide range of papers, drawn from many areas of philosophy and written in a variety of philosophical styles.

Each student will give three presentations: two of them will be co-presented with another student, and one of them will be solo. The paired presentations will occur in roughly the first half of the semester, and the solo presentations in the second half. The readings for the paired presentations are pre-selected (see the schedule at the end of the syllabus). The readings for the solo presentations are to be chosen by the presenting student in consultation with myself.

Students will be asked to write a short paper every week in which they are not assigned to present (except for the first and last weeks). The papers should be roughly 1000 words and can discuss any aspect of the reading. Papers are due at the start of each class. I will drop your two lowest short paper grades at the end of the semester.

Students will also be asked to write a final paper of roughly 3500-4000 words based (at least loosely) on one of their shorter papers from the semester. Ideally this will be related to the paper that the student has selected for their solo presentation.

Syllabus

Instructor: Gene Witmer

“Analytic Philosophy” is the label used for that sort of philosophy that developed in the first half of the 20th Century and became dominant in the English-speaking philosophical world up until the present day. There is little agreement on what the label signifies other than a common philosophical inheritance. That inheritance is precisely what this course covers: a survey of influential work by Frege, Russell, Wittgenstein, Carnap, Quine, and others. We will focus on methodological issues in philosophy and how theories of language, knowledge, and metaphilosophy have shaped the debate over the best way to proceed in addressing philosophical questions. Our goal is in part historical but more importantly philosophical: the hope is to gain a clear understanding of the arguments, theories, and questions that animated this literature and which continue to shape the dominant philosophical tradition today.

Syllabus

Instructor: Lyndal Grant

In this seminar we will work through John McDowell’s 1994 book Mind and World, arguably one of the most significant books of late twentieth century philosophy. The book is, as its title suggests, concerned primarily with the relationship between our minds and the world. The central question is this: How can our thoughts be genuinely about the world at all? McDowell’s answer to this question will take us through some central issues in contemporary analytic philosophy, including external world skepticism, the nature and content of perceptual experience, and the relationship between reasons and causes. Central to McDowell’s treatment of these issues is the work of (among others) W.V.O. Quine, Wilfred Sellars, and Donald Davidson. We will read selected papers by these and other relevant figures as we work through the book over the course of the semester.

Syllabus

Instructor: Cameron Buckner

Philosophy of science often focuses on metaphysical issues––such as unity, reduction, and explanation––in the abstract. In this course, we will rather study these questions as they arise from within the “special sciences”, such as biology, neuroscience, and psychology. In this course, we will review several debates in the special sciences. We will do a small appetizer on a mature debate about species, and then settle into the main course of focusing on the concept of intelligence in psychometrics and AI, before a little digestif on episodic memory. Central questions will involve the following:

• Which disagreements are genuine and which are merely rhetorical or terminological?
• How can we distinguish ontological disagreements from methodological or epistemological ones?
• How can or should such disagreements be resolved?
• Should findings from other sciences be deemed relevant to answering these questions––and if so, in what way?

Note that in this course we will get our hands dirty with details from the sciences. Background readings on basic texts in these areas are available on request.

Syllabus

Instructor: Jaime Ahlberg

This seminar is designed to support graduate students develop their research and start planning for a career after earning their Philosophy PhD. Students can expect opportunities to workshop their writing, develop job market materials (such as a CV, teaching portfolio, research statement, and diversity statement), and learn about research prospects in their areas of interest (including conferences, fellowships and grants, and journals). Information and tools for pursuing academic careers will be presented, as will strategies for marketing a Philosophy PhD across disciplines and outside of the academy. Students can expect to be connected with a variety of resources that aid in professionalization and job marketing.

Syllabus

Instructor: Greg Ray

Propositional calculus, quantificational logic through completeness, and an introduction to modal logic. [Catalog description.]

Instructor: Charles Goldhaber

This seminar introduces students to the British Empiricist tradition through three key figures: Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679), John Locke (1632–1704), and David Hume (1711–1776). Our study will pay special attention to the distinctive way these empiricist philosophers seek clarity in their discussions and how this aim colors their accounts of our mental dynamics. We will then consider how each philosopher’s conceptions of reason and passion shape his views about the origin and character of political authority. Some further themes include the nature of association, primary/secondary qualities, personal identity, skepticism, property, contracts, and the conditions for rebellion. Course contents are subject to change, based on the interests of enrolled students.

Instructor: Rodrigo Borges
This graduate course explores key issues in contemporary epistemology, focusing on the nature of knowledge and epistemic justification. We critically reassess the traditional definition of knowledge as justified true belief in light of the Gettier Problem. Challenging the common view that Gettier refuted this account, we examine recent theories suggesting the problem is a solvable paradox rather than a definitive refutation.

Extending into social epistemology, we investigate how social contexts shape our understanding of knowledge. Topics include testimony, collective belief, epistemic injustice, and communal practices in knowledge formation. By integrating individual and social perspectives, the course aims to demonstrate that justified true belief remains a robust account of knowledge.

Instructor: David McPherson

In this seminar we will focus on the revival of the ancient tradition of virtue ethics (especially Aristotelian virtue ethics), starting in the latter half of the 20th century and continuing up to the present. We will explore how this revival was motivated by (1) dissatisfactions with dominant modern moral theories (especially Kantianism and utilitarianism) as well as by (2) meta-ethical concerns about the modern problem of disenchantment (the perceived loss of meaning/value) as expressed in the supposed fact-value divide that informs subjectivist views of value. Regarding (1), we will assess criticisms that modern virtue ethicists have made of Kantian and utilitarian moral theories, and we will also examine Kantian and utilitarian criticisms of modern virtue ethics. Furthermore, we will consider whether modern virtue ethics should be understood as offering a rival theory of right action on a par with Kantianism and utilitarianism or as an anti-theory approach that instead seeks to derive an understanding of the virtues from concrete experiences, practices, and ethical traditions. We will examine specific accounts of the virtues, and we will also consider “the situationist challenge” to virtue ethics. Regarding (2), we will explore how modern virtue ethicists seek “re-enchantment” through defending “natural normativity.” We will examine several different views of Aristotelian ethical naturalism along with criticisms. Specific philosophers whose works we will study include Elizabeth Anscombe, Alasdair MacIntyre, Philippa Foot, John McDowell, Bernard Williams, Rosalind Hursthouse, and others.

Instructor: Jonathan Rick

Ours is an age in which, for the right price, almost anything can be bought and sold.  It is an age where the mechanism of the Market reigns supreme in organizing the production and distribution of nearly everything we might value (and, indeed, also much of what we don’t).  Ours is not merely a market economy but a market society: The principles of market exchange increasingly govern more and more of our social life, well beyond even the buying and selling of material goods.  Living in a market society, like any society, has its benefits and burdens.  The aim of this course is to interrogate the origins and value of living life on the open market – or, put alternatively, life organized within the political economic framework of Capitalism.  These will be our governing, guiding questions: What exactly is a market society or Capitalist Political Economy?  What are its commitments, constituents, and moral psychological underpinnings (for this latter question, we will focus primarily on the moral ‘economy’ of esteem)?  What are the moral successes and moral limitations of market capitalism? What alternatives are there to Market Capitalism?  Our readings be primarily historical, focusing on the political economic writings of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Adam Smith, and Karl Marx. Some contemporary sources will also be considered as well.