Own Our Ignorance

I'll leave you with an excerpt from a podcast I listen to called Jordan, Jesse GO! Two guys in their twenties are jovially discussing a favorite topic of mine: owning your ignorance.

Other sincerely awesome stuff from them is available at Maximum Fun.

Goodbye to Yesterday...

Your grades are now posted. Enjoy your summer, Wednesday night class!
Sorry, Thursday night-ers, I forgot to bring my camera!

Links Worthy of a Swine

Here are some links that are loosely related to the stuff on Utilitarianism that we are studying. Most of these deal with psychology. There's a lot of psychological research on happiness popping up lately. The first link is an overview of the psychology of happiness:

Some Dark Thoughts on Happiness

The second is a slightly optimistic take on our ability to change our baseline level of happiness. This is important to know for an ethical theory that values maximizing happiness:

The Hedonic Set Point Can Go Up

The next link deals with a famous moral thought experiment, the trolley problem. This gets brought up a lot when evaluating Utilitarianism:

Psychology of the Trolley Problem

The last link is an advanced overview of consequentialist ethical theories. Utilitarianism is a consequentialist theory, since it only looks at the consequences of an action to figure out whether an action is morally good or bad:

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Entry: Consequentialism

So what makes you happy? WaWa? Ping pong? Cookies?

Kwakiutl-Doo

Here are some more links related to our discussion of ethical relativism:

• The Kwakiutl from Northwest America [Google Kwakiutl!]
• The Dobu of Melanesia
• Ruth Benedict and Herodotus
• Cannibalism!
• An argument against the DIVERSITY THESIS: cultures morally agree more than they disagree
• A webcam dialogue on morality, psychology, and religion

(Click on the comic to enlarge it)

Relative to You, But Not to Me

Here are some links on ethical relativism. The first is an interview with a moral psychologist who supports a sophisticated version of ethical relativism.

Interview with Moral Psychologist Jonathan Haidt

The second one is an advanced overview of various versions of moral relativism:

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Article on Moral Relativism

Reading Response #4

Reading Response #4 is due April 24th for the Thursday night class, and April 30th for the Wednesday night class. The assignment is to write a one- to two-page (250- to 500-word) response on the following:

Explain and critically evaluate the ethical theory of relativism. First, briefly explain the theory in your own words. Then spend most of your response evaluating the theory. Discuss objections to the theory, and tell me your opinion on whether you think it's a good or bad theory. Be sure to defend your opinion with reasons.

Pascal's Wager

Bad Things to Good People

Here are some links on the problem of evil.

The first link is a collection of resources all about the problem of evil, including criticisms of several different responses to the problem. I mean, wow.

The NPR program Fresh Air has an audio interview with Bart Ehrman on the problem of suffering.

Next is a discussion of the "God works in mysterious ways" response: do we have enough evidence to believe that there is a reason for all the suffering in the world, but humans aren't smart enough to understand what that reason is?

Finally, does everything happen for a reason? This cartoon dinosaur has an interesting take on that question. (T-Rex also occasionally wonders why bad things happen to nice people.)

Extra Credit

The extra credit assignment is due at the beginning of class on Wednesday, April 16th, or Thursday, April 17th, depending on which class you're in. Your assignment is to write a reading response (about 250-500 words) on the following topic:

Explain and evaluate your thoughts on God now that we've gone through the philosophy of religion section of the course. In particular, focus on any changes in your thoughts. Have you changed your beliefs about God? Have you changed your reasons for your beliefs? Why or why not? Ultimately, do you think doing philosophy is a useful method in exploring this topic? Why or why not?

This assignment is potentially worth the value of a reading response (up to 50 points).

April 9th: Class Canceled!

Hey, Wednesday night class! I found out that class is canceled on April 9th due to a professional development day.

Enjoy the week off!

Like A Watch, Only More So

Here are some links on the design argument for God's existence. First is a radio interview on Hume's criticisms of the design arg. Second is an article on evolution versus intelligent design.

Third is the article about all the "design flaws" in nature. Fourth, here's an article on the recent research that might show the appendix serves a purpose, and so wouldn't count as a design flaw.

I also have a little music for you. Here's the source of the "more so" phrase:

John Gorka - I'm From New Jersey
"I'm from New Jersey | It's like Ohio | But even more so | Imagine that"

Finally, the National Public Radio show Fresh Air ran a pair of interviews with two scientists talking about whether God exists. The conversations touch on a lot of things we've been discussing in class.

Richard Dawkins pushing atheism

Francis Collins pushing theism

Hey, where's the interview with an agnostic? The media are so biased toward those with opinions.

If you've read a good article on intelligent design, recommend it to us by emailing me or posting the link in the comments section of this post.

Midterm

The midterm is going to be held at the beginning of class on March 26th for the Wednesday class, and April 3rd for the Thursday class. It's worth 25% of your overall grade. You'll have 80 minutes to complete it. It covers everything we've gone over in class so far.

Also, I expect you to stick around after the midterm, because we WILL be learning stuff in class after it's done.

Feel free to insult me in the comments for putting you through the terrible ordeal of learning immediately after a test.

Think [Tap Dance] God

There's a philosophy comic strip that ran a whole series on the ontological argument that god exists. Here are links to the comics:

Comic #1: The argument

Comic #2: Existence is better? Huh?

Comic #3: So the greatest possible pizza exists?

Comic #4: The perfect girlfriend!

If you're still jonesing for the a priori, there's also this entry on ontological arguments in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Finally, here's what Guanilo said to Anselm after he presented Anselm his "Greatest Possible Island" criticism:

Reading Response #2

Reading Response #2 is due at the beginning of class on Wednesday, February 27th, or Thursday, February 28th, depending on what class you're in. Here is the assignment:

Explain your thoughts about God. Do you believe there is a God? If so, what kind of God or Gods? Do you believe that there is no God? Do you not believe one way or the other? Also, explain why you believe whatever it is you believe about God. What reasons do you have for believing what you believe? Do you think these are good reasons, or bad reasons?

The response isn't based on any specific reading from the textbook. Instead, it's more of a chance for you to think about your own opinion before we discuss God stuff in class over the next several weeks. You won't be graded on your opinion. You'll be graded on how well you EXPLAIN and EVALUATE your reasons for your opinion.

Past Futures Are the New Past Pasts

Do you find yourself obsessed with Hume's question of what could justify inductive reasoning? Boy, do I have a link for you:

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: The Problem of Induction
If you're tired of that one, there's also a new problem of induction. Or, you could watch this video of Lewis Black describing his failure to reason inductively every year around Halloween:


In class, we talked about how attempts to justify induction beg the question. Here's a dinosaur comic on question-begging. (Click on the comic to enlarge it)


And here's the video for Mims's logically delicious song "This is Why I'm Hot":

Finally, here's a stick figure comic about scientists' efforts to confirm that the future will be like the past.

Innate Ideas? I've Had a Few

Here are a couple articles by Steven Pinker that offer some psychological insights on the innate ideas debate we've been discussing in class:

The Brain’s Versatile Toolbox (1997)

Grammar Puss (1994)

But hey, why read when you can watch a video? With that in mind, here's his appearance on The Colbert Report (the second part is particularly relevant to innate ideas):

Pinker has a few books on this stuff, and a lot of other interesting articles, too. Not everyone agrees with Pinker, though. Here's an article about a South American tribe that might be a counterexample to the claim that there are innate aspects of language development.

The Interpreter
(The linguist researching the tribe explains his case more here. Steven Pinker and others respond to him here.)

One more link. Here's an advanced survey article on the rationalism/empiricism debate from my favorite free online philosophy encyclopedia:

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Rationalism vs. Empiricism

Yes, there is more than one free online philosophy encyclopedia.

Still Trust Your Senses?

Julian Beever creates sidewalk art that looks three-dimensional when viewed from a certain angle. Here's one of his creations:

More pictures of his stuff are available here and here. It's pretty hard to tell that these are two-dimensional drawings. Oh, senses! Why won't you stop deceiving me?!?

ALSO: In a comment on the last post, Jim gave an interesting response to computer simulation skeptical scenarios like the Matrix: perhaps the computer simulation just is our reality. That's what we'd be referring to, after all. When someone stuck in a computer simulation says 'clock,' she's referring to the computer simulation of a clock. Good thinking, Jim! Here's an article on that response.

Link Tested, Keanu Approved

Here's a trio of links. The first one is a guide to reading philosophy that might help you if you're having trouble understanding the assigned readings.

Jim Pryor's Guide to Reading Philosophy

The next two relate to epistemology and skepticism. The first is about the philosophical implications of the movie The Matrix. If Neo read it, he'd say "whoa."

The Matrix: Dream Skepticism

The last link is an interesting take on skeptical scenarios (or what our textbook fancily calls universal belief falsifiers). Most of us think it's pretty unlikely that we're in a computer simulation like the Matrix. After all, these skeptical scenarios seem so weird. But Nick Bostrom provides some compelling reasons to think that these scenarios may be highly probable, after all.

What's the Probability that We're Living in the Matrix?

(A more advanced version of Bostrom's argument is available here, and a dinosaur comic on this issue is available here.) By the way, if you have any links you think I or others in class might find interesting, let me know. And feel free to comment on any of these posts.

Reading Response #1

Reading Response #1 is due at the beginning of class on Wednesday, 6th or Thursday, February 7th, depending on which section you're in. In a 250- to 500-word essay response, answer the following question:

What does Descartes say he cannot be certain of? What does Descartes say he can be certain of? What are his arguments for this? Do you agree with Descartes? Why or why not?

The response is based on the Descartes reading from pages 58-71 of the textbook.

Deductive Args

Here are the answers to the handout on deductive arguments that we went over in class.

1) All bats are mammals.
All mammals live on earth.
All bats live on earth.

Valid, Sound

2) All students in here are mammals.
All humans are mammals.
All students in here are humans.

Invalid, Unsound (because it's invalid)

3) (from Stephen Colbert)
Bush is either a great prez or the greatest prez.
Bush isn’t a great prez.
Bush is the greatest prez.

Valid, Unsound (questionable premises)

4) Sean either went to school or something kept him from going to school.
Nothing kept Sean from going to school.
Sean went to school.

Valid, Sound

5) Some people are funny.
Sean is a person.
Sean is funny.

Invalid, Unsound (because it's invalid)

6) If Sean sings, then students cringe.
Sean is singing right now.
Students are cringing right now.

Valid, Unsound (false second premise: I'm not singing right now)

7) It either rains or Sean swims.
If it rains, then Sean gets wet.
If Sean swims, then he gets wet.
I get wet.

Valid, Unsound (false first premise: sometimes it isn't raining and I'm not swimming)

8) If Sean sings, then students cringe.
Students are cringing right now.
Sean is singing right now.

Invalid, Unsound (it's invalid, and false second premise)

9) All email forwards are annoying.
Some email forwards are false.
Some annoying things are false.

Valid, Unsound (questionable first premise)

10) If Sean sings, then students cringe.
Sean isn't singing right now.
Students aren't cringing right now.

Invalid, Unsound (it's invalid)

11) All bats are mammals.
All bats have wings.
All mammals have wings.

Invalid, Unsound (because it's invalid)

12) If Sean sings, then students cringe.
Students aren't cringing right now.
Sean isn't singing right now.

Valid, Sound

13) All dads have beards.
All bearded people are mean.
All dads are mean.

Valid, Unsound (false premises)

(More on Sisyphus)

Understanding Args

Here are the answers to the group work handout on understanding arguments.

1. (P1) Fairdale has the best team.
(C) Fairdale will win the championship

2. (P1) The housing market is depressed.
(P2) Interest rates are low.
(C) It's a good time to buy a home.

3. (P1) China is guilty of extreme human rights abuses.
(P2) China refuses to implement democratic reforms.
(C) The U.S. should refuse to deal with the present Chinese government.

4. (P1) The revocation of the 55 mph speed limit has resulted in an increased number of auto fatalities.
(C) we must alleviate this problem with stricter speed limit enforcement.

5. (P1) The results of the Persian Gulf War were good.
(C) The U. S. military is both capable and competent.

6. (P1) Scientific discoveries are continually debunking religious myths.
(P2) Science provides the only hope for solving the many problems faced by humankind.
(C) Science provides a more accurate view of human life than does religion.

7. (P1) Jesse is one year old.
(P2) Most one-year-olds can walk.
(C) It follows that Jesse can walk.

8. (P1) I'm very good at my job.
(C) I deserve a raise.

9. (P1) Freedom of speech and expressions are essential to a democratic form of government.
(P2) As soon as we allow some censorship, it won't be long before censorship will be used to silence the opinions critical of the government.
(P3) Once we allow some censorship, we will have no more freedom than the Germans did under Hitler.
(C) We must resist all effort to allow the government to censor entertainment.

10. (P1) Maebe didn't show up for work today.
(P2) Maebe never missed work unless she was sick.
(C) Maebe is probably sick today.

11. (P1) The United States, as the most powerful nation in the world, has a moral obligation to give assistance to people who are subjected to inhumane treatment.
(P2) The ethnic Albanians were being persecuted in Kosovo.
(C) It was proper for the U.S. to become involved in the air campaign against Kosovo.

12. (P1) The last person we hired from Bayview Tech turned out to be a bad employee.
(C) I'm not willing to hire anybody else from that school again.

----------------
Hat tip: I took examples 1-8 (with some revisions) from Beth Rosdatter's website, and examples 9-13 (with some revisions) from Jon Young's website.

Revised Wednesday Schedule

We've been forced into using the 4th edition of the textbook. Here's a revised schedule with the correct page numbers for the 4th edition. Changes from the old schedule are in bold.

January 30
-Epistemology | Descartes vs. Skepticism (pages 50-53; 58-71)
-Epistemology | Descartes vs. Skepticism (pages 50-53; 58-71)

February 6
-Epistemology | Rationalism: Plato (pages 71—82)
-Epistemology | Empiricism: Locke (pages 88—96)
(Reading Response #1 due)

February 13
-Epistemology | Empiricism: Hume (pages 104—113)
-QUIZ; Epistemology | Hume Wrap-up

February 20
-Does God Exist? | Aquinas & The Cosmological Arg (pages 321—332)
-Does God Exist? | Taylor & The Cosmological Argument (pages 333—338)

February 27
-Does God Exist? | Ontological Argument (pages 347—352)
-Does God Exist? | Paley & The Design Argument (pages 338—341)
(Reading Response #2 due)

March 5
SPRING BREAK! (woo?)


March 12
-Does God Exist? | Hume & The Design Argument (pages 342—347)
-Does God Exist? | Problem of Evil Intro & Review for Midterm (pages 366—370)

March 19
-MIDTERM
-Does God Exist? | Hick & The Problem of Evil (pages 370—382)

March 26
-Faith & Reason | Pascal (pages 352—357)
-Intro to Ethics | Plato (pages 396—409)
(Reading Response #3 due)

April 2
-Ethical Relativism | Herodotus & Benedict (pages 411—423)
-Utilitarianism | Intro (pages 450—454) & Mill (pages 457—462)

April 9
-Utilitarianism | Norcross (pages 462—468)
-Deontological Ethics | Kant (pages 468-482)
(Reading Response #4 due)

April 16
-Virtue Ethics | Intro (pages 486—494) & Aristotle (pages 495—500)
-Virtue Ethics Wrap-up

April 23
-Final Exam Review

April 30
FINAL EXAM

Revised Thursday Schedule

We've been forced into using the 4th edition of the textbook. Here's a revised schedule with the correct page numbers for the 4th edition. Changes from the old schedule are in bold.

January 31
-Epistemology | Descartes vs. Skepticism (pages 50-53; 58-71)
-Epistemology | Descartes vs. Skepticism (pages 50-53; 58-71)

February 7
-Epistemology | Rationalism: Plato (pages 71—82)
-Epistemology | Empiricism: Locke (pages 88—96)
(Reading Response #1 due)

February 14
-Epistemology | Empiricism: Hume (pages 104—113)
-QUIZ; Epistemology | Hume Wrap-up

February 21
-Does God Exist? | Aquinas & The Cosmological Arg (pages 321—332)
-Does God Exist? | Taylor & The Cosmological Argument (pages 333—338)

February 28
-Does God Exist? | Ontological Argument (pages 347—352)
-Does God Exist? | Paley & The Design Argument (pages 338—341)
(Reading Response #2 due)

March 6
SPRING BREAK! (woo?)


March 13
-Does God Exist? | Hume & The Design Argument (pages 342—347)
-Does God Exist? | Problem of Evil Intro & Review for Midterm (pages 366—370)

March 20
-MIDTERM
-Does God Exist? | Hick & The Problem of Evil (pages 370—382)

March 27
-Faith & Reason | Pascal (pages 352—357)
-Intro to Ethics | Plato (pages 396—409)
(Reading Response #3 due)

April 3
-Ethical Relativism | Herodotus & Benedict (pages 411—423)
-Utilitarianism | Intro (pages 450—454) & Mill (pages 457—462)

April 10
-Utilitarianism | Norcross (pages 462—468)
-Deontological Ethics | Kant (pages 468-482)
(Reading Response #4 due)

April 17
-Virtue Ethics | Intro (pages 486—494) & Aristotle (pages 495—500)
-Virtue Ethics Wrap-up

April 24
-Final Exam Review

May 1
FINAL EXAM

My Prerogative

Nothing says 'philosophy as a worldview' like 1989 Bobby Brown:

Bobby Brown - My Prerogative

Email Subscriptions

So why does this course have a blog? Well, why is anything anything?

A blog (short for “web log”) is a website that works like a journal – users write posts that are sorted by date based on when they were written. You can find important course information (like assignments, due dates, reading schedules, etc.) on the blog. I’ll also be updating the blog throughout the semester, posting interesting items related to the stuff we’re currently discussing in class. I used a blog for this course last semester, and it seemed helpful. Hopefully it can benefit our course, too.

Since I’ll be updating the blog a lot throughout the semester, you should check it frequently. There are, however, some convenient ways to do this without simply going to the blog each day. The best way to do this is by getting an email subscription, so any new blog post I write automatically gets emailed to you. (You can also subscribe to the rss feed, if you know what that means.) To get an email subscription:

1. Go to http://ccclogic08.blogspot.com.

2. At the main page, enter your email address at the top of the right column (under “EMAIL SUBSCRIPTION: Enter your Email”) and click the "Subscribe me!" button.

3. This will take you to a new page. Follow the directions under #2, where it says “To help stop spam, please type the text here that you see in the image below. Visually impaired or blind users should contact support by email.” Once you type the text, click the "Subscribe me!" button again.

4. You'll then get an email regarding the blog subscription. (Check your spam folder if you haven’t received an email after a day.) You have to confirm your registration. Do so by clicking on the "Click here to activate your account" link in the email you receive.

5. This will bring you to a page that says "Your subscription is confirmed!" Now you're subscribed.

If you are unsure whether you've subscribed, ask me (609-980-8367; slandis@camdencc.edu). I can check who's subscribed and who hasn't.

Course Schedule: Thursdays

January 17
-Check. Check One. Sibilance (intro to class; no reading)
-Doing Philosophy (no reading)

January 24
-Some Logic | Deductive Arguments (pages 37—45)
-Some Logic | Inductive & Abductive Arguments (pages 4—11)

January 31
-Epistemology | Descartes vs. Skepticism (pages 50-53; 58-71)
-Epistemology | Descartes vs. Skepticism (pages 50-53; 58-71)

February 7
-Epistemology | Rationalism: Plato (pages 71—82)
-Epistemology | Empiricism: Locke (pages 88—96)
(Reading Response #1 due)

February 14
-Epistemology | Empiricism: Hume (pages 104—113)
-QUIZ; Epistemology | Hume Wrap-up

February 21
-Does God Exist? | Aquinas & The Cosmological Arg (pages 306—316)
-Does God Exist? | Taylor & The Cosmological Argument (pages 317—322)

February 28
-Does God Exist? | Ontological Argument (pages 337—342)
-Does God Exist? | Paley & The Design Argument (pages 322—325)
(Reading Response #2 due)

March 6
SPRING BREAK! (woo?)


March 13
-Does God Exist? | Hume & The Design Argument (pages 326—337)
-Does God Exist? | Problem of Evil Intro & Review for Midterm (pages 356—360)

March 20
-MIDTERM
-Does God Exist? | Hick & The Problem of Evil (pages 360—372)

March 27
-Faith & Reason | Pascal (pages 342—347)
-Intro to Ethics | Plato (pages 400—402 & 408—415)
(Reading Response #3 due)

April 3
-Ethical Relativism | Herodotus & Benedict (pages 415—427)
-Utilitarianism | Intro (pages 454—458) & Mill (pages 461—466)

April 10
-Utilitarianism | Norcross (pages 466—472)
-Deontological Ethics | Kant (pages 472-484)
(Reading Response #4 due)

April 17
-Virtue Ethics | Intro (pages 490—498) & Aristotle (pages 490—504)
-Virtue Ethics Wrap-up

April 24
-Final Exam Review

May 1
FINAL EXAM

Course Schedule: Wednesdays

January 16
-Check. Check One. Sibilance (intro to class; no reading)
-Doing Philosophy (no reading)

January 23
-Some Logic | Deductive Arguments (pages 37—45)
-Some Logic | Inductive & Abductive Arguments (pages 4—11)

January 30
-Epistemology | Descartes vs. Skepticism (pages 50-53; 58-71)
-Epistemology | Descartes vs. Skepticism (pages 50-53; 58-71)

February 6
-Epistemology | Rationalism: Plato (pages 71—82)
-Epistemology | Empiricism: Locke (pages 88—96)
(Reading Response #1 due)

February 13
-Epistemology | Empiricism: Hume (pages 104—113)
-QUIZ; Epistemology | Hume Wrap-up

February 20
-Does God Exist? | Aquinas & The Cosmological Arg (pages 306—316)
-Does God Exist? | Taylor & The Cosmological Argument (pages 317—322)

February 27
-Does God Exist? | Ontological Argument (pages 337—342)
-Does God Exist? | Paley & The Design Argument (pages 322—325)
(Reading Response #2 due)

March 5
SPRING BREAK! (woo?)


March 12
-Does God Exist? | Hume & The Design Argument (pages 326—337)
-Does God Exist? | Problem of Evil Intro & Review for Midterm (pages 356—360)

March 19
-MIDTERM
-Does God Exist? | Hick & The Problem of Evil (pages 360—372)

March 26
-Faith & Reason | Pascal (pages 342—347)
-Intro to Ethics | Plato (pages 400—402 & 408—415)
(Reading Response #3 due)

April 2
-Ethical Relativism | Herodotus & Benedict (pages 415—427)
-Utilitarianism | Intro (pages 454—458) & Mill (pages 461—466)

April 9
-Utilitarianism | Norcross (pages 466—472)
-Deontological Ethics | Kant (pages 472-484)
(Reading Response #4 due)

April 16
-Virtue Ethics | Intro (pages 490—498) & Aristotle (pages 490—504)
-Virtue Ethics Wrap-up

April 23
-Final Exam Review

April 30
FINAL EXAM

Course Details

Introduction to Philosophy
Gloucester County College
Philosophy 101, Spring 2008
Section E1: Wednesdays, 6:40–9:10 p.m., Scott 705
Section E2: Thursdays, 6:00–8:30 p.m., Scott 705

Instructor: Sean Landis
Email: slandis@gccnj.edu
Phone: 609-980-8367
Course Website: http://gccphilosophy08.blogspot.com

Required Texts
The Philosophical Journey: An Interactive Approach, 4th Edition, William F. Lawhead

About the Course
This course is designed to introduce students to philosophy. Throughout the semester, we are going to explore a handful of classic philosophical questions: What is knowledge? Does God exist? What is the nature of good and evil?

In examining these issues, it is my hope that we can also develop the skills of doing philosophy—understanding philosophical arguments, evaluating the quality of such arguments, and developing good arguments of our own on philosophical topics.

Grading
A = 930-1000 total points
A- = 900-929 total points
B+ = 867-899 total points
B = 830-866 total points
B- = 800-829 total points
C+ = 767-799 total points
C = 730-766 total points
C- = 700-729 total points
D+ = 667-699 total points
D = 630-666 total points
D- = 600-629 total points
F = below 600 total points

Assignments
Midterm: 250 points
Final : 350 points
Quiz : 150 points
4 Reading Responses : 50 points each (200 points total)
Attendance/Participation: 50 points

Exams: There will be a midterm and a final exam. The midterm tests everything covered during the first half of the course, and will last about half of a class period (80 minutes) on the scheduled day. The final exam is cumulative—it tests everything covered throughout the whole course, not just the second half. The final will also last 80 minutes, and take place on the last day of class.

Quizzes: There will be a quiz at the end of the first sections on logic and epistemology. The quiz will last 20 minutes.

Reading Responses: There will be four reading responses, which are to be handed in at the beginning of class the day they are due. I will not accept homework at any other time, unless you cannot make class due to sudden illness/injury (again, with a doctor’s note), religious observance, or official university business.

Reading responses consist of an approximately one- to two-paged (typed, double-spaced, 12-point font, normal margins) response to a specific question about one or more of the week’s readings. The responses are a chance to do philosophy. To this effect, the focus of the responses will be on paraphrasing (demonstrating that you understand the argument by putting it in your own words) and critically evaluating (presenting objections to the argument or responding to such objections) the philosophical arguments being presented in the readings.

Classroom Policies
Academic Integrity: Cheating and Plagiarism will not be tolerated in the class. Students found guilty of either will definitely fail the exam or assignment—and possibly the entire class. (Come to me if you are unsure what constitutes cheating or plagiarism.)

Excused Absenses: Make-up exams, quizzes, in-class projects, and oral reports will only be rescheduled for any excused absences (excused absences include religious observance, official college business, and illness or injury – with a doctor’s note). An unexcused absence on the day of any assignment or test will result in a zero on that assignment or test.