Graduate Course Listing Spring 2010
Click here to see Fall 2009 Course Descriptions
Spring 2010 Course Descriptions
83211 01 (27878) Aristotle: Hylomorphism
Kelsey
3:30-6:00 T
We will look at Aristotle’s hylomorphism, first as it is developed in the early books of the Physics, and then as it is handled in some other texts (e.g. De gen. et corr., De anima, Metaphysics), with special emphasis throughout on understanding the problem(s) the doctrine is supposed to solve.”
83255 01 (TBA) Medieval Theories of Cosmic Harmony
Gersh
12:30-1:45 TR
Cross List: MI 60371 01 (28221)
A study of Pythagorean tradition in the Middle Ages using both philosophical-theological and music theoretical texts.
83266 01 (24740) Hume
Joy
1:30-2:45 MW
This seminar examines Hume's epistemology, metaphysics, and ethics. We will consider how Hume transformed early modern philosophical problems and still influences ongoing debates today on these topics:
1. representation and belief
2. mental and physical causation
3. psychology of action and moral evaluation
Readings will focus on his Treatise of Human Nature, Enquiry concerning Human Understanding, and Enquiry concerning the Principles of Morals. We will also read more recent metaphysicians and philosophers of mind who discuss the pros and cons of contemporary Humean views of the above topics.
Requirements: Two medium-length papers and several short oral reports.
83501 01 (20124) Metaphysics
Rea
11:45-1:00 MW
This course will survey some of the central problems and debates in contemporary metaphysics. We will discuss as many of the following topics as time permits: metaontology, universals, possibility and necessity, time and persistence, composition, and material constitution.
Readings by Armstrong, Broad, Chisholm, Cartwright, Lewis, McTaggart, Plantinga, Quine, Sider, Unger, Wiggins, Zimmerman, and others.
Requirements: A term paper.
83701 01 (21573) Epistemology
DePaul
2:00-3:15 TR
93325 01 (27879) Thinking the Impossible: Recent French Philosophy Since 1960
Gutting
11:00-12:15 TR
This course will be historical but with metaphilosophical intent. We will look at some aspects of the history of French philosophy from the 1960s through the 1990s in order to arrive at an account of what it was to "do philosophy" in France during this period, what this sort of philosophizing was able to achieve, and how it differs from the analytic philosophy dominant in anglophone countries.
We will begin with the three most important philosophers who came to prominence in the 1960s: Michel Foucault, Gilles Deleuze, and Jacques Derrida. After some discussion of the educational system and cultural milieu that produced them we will move to a detailed treatment of how they formulated and began to carry out their philosophical projects in the 1960s and 1970s. This will first of all require an understanding of their reaction to Hegel's philosophy, particularly in the extremely influential interpretation provided by their teacher, Jean Hyppolite. I will argue that their desire to appropriate what was valuable and avoid what was dangerous in Hegelian thought (as presented by Hyppolite) was a primary motivation of their philosophizing. We will also look at the influence of Heidegger and Sartre. Most important, we will see how Foucault, Derrida, and Deleuze can all be seen as developing their fundamental philosophical stances out of distinctive readings of Nietzsche.
The second part of the course will expand the discussion to topics and philosophers that became prominent in the 80s and 90s. We will look at the revival of ethics, associated above all with Emmanuel Levinas and discuss the ethical turns of Derrida and Foucault. We will also discuss the return to phenomenology and its use to revive religious experience as a philosophical topic, focusing on the work of Jean-Luc Marion and his debate with Derrida on religion and phenomenology. There will also be a treatment of Alain Badiou's recent work on the event and ethics.
Finally, we will make explicit the course’s meta-philosophical theme, showing how French philosophy since the 1960s can be plausibly read as primarily concerned with thinking the impossible. We will explore the various forms this project takes and discuss what standards of evaluation are appropriate for evaluating it, particularly in comparison with analytic philosophy.
Readings for the course will include a draft of a book ms. I am currently revising, as well as relevant selections from Foucault, Deleuze, Derrida, Levinas, Marion, and Badiou. There be a term paper due at the end of the course.
NB: There will be very little overlap between the material covered here and the material covered in my graduate seminar on French philosophy offered in Spring, 2008.
93406 01 (27880) Divine Providence
Flint
9:30-10:45 TR
One of the central elements of orthodox Christian belief is the affirmation of divine providence: God is seen not merely as the creator of the world, but as its all-knowing controller and governor as well. Given the existence of human freedom, however, questions regarding the manner and degree of this governance naturally arise.
The overall purpose of this course will be to examine and evaluate various conceptions of providence which stem from attempts to answer these questions. More specifically, the course will focus on the view of providence offered by the proponents of middle knowledge, and the objections raised against this Molinist view by both its traditional Thomist opponents and contemporary analytic philosophers, especially advocates of "open theism". Possible employments of the concept of middle knowledge to further our understanding of the free will defense, foreknowledge, omnipotence, infallibility, petitionary prayer, the Incarnation, and other issues will also be considered.
Texts: The two main texts for the course will be (i) Freddoso's translation of (and introduction to) Part IV of Molina's Concordia and (ii) Flint's Divine Providence: The Molinist Account. Others whose works we will examine include William Hasker, Robert Adams, and William Lane Craig.
Requirements: The class will consist primarily of informal lectures, with student participation encouraged and expected. Two medium-sized papers (roughly 12 pages each) will be required. At least one of these papers will be discussed in class. Students will also have the opportunity to lead class discussion once during the semester.
93620 01 (27881) The Political Philosophy of Rawls
Weithman
12:30-1:45 TR
The influence of John Rawls’s work on academic political and moral theorizing, especially on the academic disciplines of political and moral philosophy, would be difficult to overstate. The theoretical ambitions and the clear normative implications of his book A Theory of Justice showed the academy how much could still be accomplished in political philosophy at time when many moral philosophers concentrated almost exclusively on metaethical questions. The book’s systematicity and clarity showed that these accomplishments could be won without loss of rigor. Its obvious connections to Kant and the social contract tradition did much to revive philosophers’ interest in the history of liberal thought. Consequently, the agenda of contemporary political philosophy, and much of the agenda of moral philosophy, has been set by Rawls’s work in at least this sense: even those who disagree with him are bound to respond to him. He is unarguably the greatest political philosopher of the second half of the 20th century and is arguably the greatest of the whole of it.
This seminar will be a careful study of Rawls’s two most important books: A Theory of Justice and Political Liberalism. Requirements will probably include several short papers, a term paper and a presentation.
93812 01 (27882) HOPOS from the Scientific Revolution to 1900
Howard
11:00-12:15 TR
Much of the history of philosophy from the early modern period through the nineteenth century can be written as the history of philosophical reactions to the development of modern science, especially the physics of Newton and Maxwell, but to some degree also the chemistry, biology, physiological psychology, and sociology that came into their own in the nineteenth century. What was the epistemic basis of this new scientific knowledge? What was the proper method of science? What were the scope and limits of this new science?
This course will trace the main themes in the development of the philosophy of science during this period. We will start with early reactions to Newton on the part of Berkeley, Hume, Kant, and Reid. In the nineteenth century, we will chart the rise of distinctive schools of thought as the philosophy of science becomes conscious of itself as a distinct area within philosophy, including the positivism of Comte, the inductivism of Mill, the hypothetico-deductivism of Whewell and Bernard, the Scot's school's emphasis on the fundamental role of models in science, and the neo-Kantianism of Helmholtz. As we reach the threshold of the twentieth century we will pay special attention to such precursors of logical empiricism as Mach, Poincaré, and Duhem.
The readings will be a mix of primary and secondary sources.
Students will be required to write a term paper and a take-home final examination93821 01 (27884) Science and Social Values
Kourany
5:15-6:30 MW
It is now the fiftieth anniversary of C.P. Snow’s famous “Two Cultures” essay and not only are aspects of Snow’s science/humanities divide still in place, but the divide has seemed here and there to harden into hostility. At the same time, advances in nanoscience and technology, genetics, robotics, and other areas of science augur peril as well as promise, peril that the resources of the humanities might do much to ameliorate. What contribution might philosophy offer?
We will begin by reflecting on Snow’s classic essay, then move on to a new book by philosopher of science John Forge, The Responsible Scientist: A Philosophical Inquiry (2008), and then consider a selection of essays that complicate the picture Forge presents. The burden of these essays is that a variety of social values already shape (for good or ill) the landscape in which Forge’s responsible scientist operates. This will encourage a shift to a more comprehensive approach to science and we will consider the offerings of at least two other books—Philip Kitcher’s Science, Truth, and Democracy (2001) and Helen Longino’s The Fate of Knowledge (2001). Of course, questions concerning the divide between facts and values, the nature of the “pure science” / “applied science” distinction, the attractions of scientific autonomy vs. the social direction of science, and the conditions of scientific rationality and scientific objectivity will engage us throughout the term.
The style of the course will be discussions rather than lectures, and these will be led by members of the class. And the requirements will include two papers as well as class presentations.
93864 01 (27886) Chance and Evolution
Ramsey
6:30-9:00 T
Thirty-five years ago, Jacques Monod published his famous work, Chance and Necessity. Since the publication of this founding work, there has been much debate over the nature of chance in evolution. It seems that contemporary evolutionary theory requires an objective notion of chance. For example, some have argued that natural selection is merely an empty tautology: If natural selection is "survival of the fittest" and the fittest are simply those who survive (and reproduce), then natural selection does indeed appear to be circular. Theorists have attempted to get around this problem by proposing that the organism’s fitness is a probabilistic propensity to produce offspring, not actual offspring produced. While this does indeed avoid the circularity, it seems to rely on a notion of objective chance. But if there is chance in evolutionary biology, where does it come from? Does it somehow percolate up from chance in quantum theory? Or is there such a thing as macro probabilities that are not merely based in micro probabilities? And if there is no such thing as objective macro probabilities, what does this say about how evolutionary theory should be conceived?
Requirements include in-class participation (including occasional presentations) and a term paper.
93918 01 (27889) Truth
David
3:30-6:00 R
IIn this seminar, we will look into the question: What is truth? At the moment, I plan to discuss the following topics—not necessarily in this order:
• The traditional correspondence theory of truth (including some history);
• Contemporary “truthmaker” theories;
• The bearers of truth (sentences, statements, beliefs, propositions);
• The contemporary debate between substantive and deflationary accounts of truth;
• Relativism about truth.
II am not very dogmatic about this list: it could be expanded or otherwise revised depending on student interests.
Background reading: Wolfgang Künne: Conceptions of Truth (Oxford 2003). (Students should have this book available as background reading.) The main texts will be made available electronically.
Requirements: A term paper of about 20 pages. Three short (about 5 page) exposition papers. Overall participation in class discussion.
98698 01 (TBA) Graduate Research Seminar
Blanchette
3:00-5:00 M
