Course Objectives

To introduce students to a variety of theories and arguments about the nature of ethical thinking and moral judgment

To provide students with an opportunity to reflect on what it means to lead an ethical life and on some controversial moral issues

To learn and practice skills and methods that may be helpful in thinking about ethical problems.

To introduce students to some critiques of traditional ethical theories -- critiques that raise questions about the role of race, class and gender in ethical thinking and critiques that challenge the assumption that general theories are what we want from moral philosophy.

Course Materials

The following books are (or will be) available at the bookstore: Aristotle, Nichomachean Ethics; John Stuart Mill, Utilitarianism; Kant, Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals; Wilcox and Wilcox, Applied Ethics in American Society. Other course readings will be photocopied or made available online. Please bring the text to be discussed to class with you every time.

Class website

I maintain a simple website where I post course handouts and information. The URL is www.woldww.net/classes/. There are notes and study questions posted there to help make sense of some of the more difficult readings. I will also post links to some assigned reading that is available online.

Email

Email is the best way to get in touch with me (better than leaving a message on my voice-mail). I will also use the University list-serves to send messages to the class from time to time with schedule changes, reading notes, etc. Please check your Hamline email regularly.

Course Description

In this course you will encounter several different kinds of ethical questions:

First, some questions about ethics: Is there such a thing as truth in ethics? Or is it all just 'a matter of opinion'? Can ethical questions be answered through rational inquiry? Or must they be approached in some other way (through religious faith or feeling or intuition)? Is it important to have ethical principles and to stick to them no matter what? How can we know if an ethical principle is correct? (Is there really any such thing as a correct ethical principle, or is it just a matter of deciding which principles I am 'comfortable' with?) Can rational inquiry in ethics lead to the development of an ethical theory that explains or justifies our ethical judgments, perhaps by showing us how they can be derived from some more basic ethical principle? (We will study several attempts to develop such a theory.) Are the ethical theories developed in the 'Western' philosophical tradition really as universal and objective as they pretend to be, or do they express the particular interests and limited points of view of the people who constructed them? (We will approach this question primarily by studying a feminist perspective according to which traditional ethical theories and discussions express a distinctively male perspective.)

Second, we'll examine what we might call ethical issues: Do we have a duty to help those who are less fortunate than ourselves and, if so, to what extent? Is it immoral for two people of the same gender to have sex with one another? When, if ever, is it morally acceptable to have an abortion or to end an ill or injured person's life? And so on. Most of us have opinions about questions like these and most of us have had at least some opportunity to think about them and discuss them. Here, we will try to see if the 'professional thinkers' have anything to offer us that can help to settle these contentious issues, and we will explore how they are approached from a variety of moral perspectives. In this process, we'll try to sharpen the skills we need to think carefully about these issues for ourselves.

I cannot promise we will answer any of these questions to your satisfaction. They are, for the most part, very difficult questions. What we can hope to do is to learn something about how various historical and contemporary thinkers have answered them, and to become somewhat more careful and critical in our own efforts to answer them.

Conduct of the Course

Class time will be devoted largely to discussion, sometimes in small groups, mostly all together. I will occasionally lecture, more often I will answer questions as they come up in discussion, and even more often I will try to help you figure out how to answer your questions yourself. Often I will end the class with some remarks intended to orient you to the next day’s reading.

Much of our discussion will focus on understanding and evaluating the texts. This will work well only if you have done the assigned reading carefully -- often twice or three times -- and given it some thought. In philosophy we are interested not in the information that can be extracted from a text, nor simply in the conclusions or opinions that an author expresses; we are primarily interested in understanding and assessing the reasoning that an author uses to try to establish or support those conclusions. This requires a very careful sort of reading.

The point of struggling with these difficult texts is not only to understand what some great minds have produced. A guided tour through the Museum of Great Ideas is a very good thing, but not the best thing that philosophy has to offer. Better is the opportunity to learn to think for yourself. The texts can serve as models of careful and/or creative thinking, as challenges to our prejudices and assumptions, and as starting points for our own reflections. But the only way to learn to philosophize is to enter the conversation yourself. In this way a course in philosophy is more like a course in drawing or sculpture -- a studio art course -- than like a course in art history or art appreciation. You can’t learn to draw by just watching other people draw, and you can’t learn to do philosophy by just listening and reading. You have to express your views and expose them to other people’s critical reactions, and then figure out what to say in reply, and so on.

Assignments and Grading

Reading assignments

I expect you to find time (an hour or two) to do the reading for each class and to come prepared to discuss it. Come to class ready to say what you found interesting, what you found confusing, silly, or just plain wrong, what seemed to you to be the most important claims made, and what arguments or justifications were offered for those claims.

Reading response papers

20 % of your grade will be earned by submitting brief (1/4-1/2 of a double-spaced, typed page, perhaps just a few sentences) responses to the readings for each class. These must be turned in at the beginning of the class period to be counted. They can contain questions, objections, observations and/or reactions to the reading for that class. Each one should contain a brief statement of what you take to be the main point of the reading assigned for that day. I will not grade these, but I will reject any that do not seem to be based on a reasonably conscientious reading of the assignment for that day. You can miss a few of these and still earn an ‘A’ for this part of the course work, but missing more than a few will be penalized on the following schedule: 85% completed = A; 70% = B; 55% = C; 40% = D; less than 40% = F. I will also notice and reward particularly perceptive or thoughtful response papers.

Class discussion

10% of your grade will be determined by my evaluation of the quality of your participation in class discussions. Just showing up and paying attention earns a C for this component; occasionally making helpful contributions earns a B; regularly making helpful contributions earns an A. Helpful contributions include: asking pertinent questions, answering questions asked by the instructor or by other students, expressing your views about the texts or topics we are discussing, responding (relevantly and respectfully) to the views expressed by others.

Essays

You will be asked to write two short (3-5 page) essays during the semester. Each paper will count for 17.5% of your grade. Please keep copies of all the work you hand in.

Exams

We will have two one-hour, in-class exams -- one at mid-semester, one during the scheduled final exam period. Each exam will count for 17.5% of your grade. Exam questions will be selected (by me) from a list I will hand out in advance.

Plagiarism

All work submitted for this course must be your own. Plagiarism is the academic ‘sin’ of presenting someone else’s work as your own. It is plagiarism if you copy something verbatim (word for word) from a published source, from the Internet, or from another student. It is still plagiarism if you rearrange, paraphrase, condense, or summarize someone else’s work without making clear to your reader what is your contribution and what is taken from your source. If the exact wording comes from your source, then use quotation marks. If the idea comes from someone else, give him or her credit for it. The way to do this is to cite your sources. There is a clear and detailed explanation of various forms of plagiarism and of proper citation practices at http://clover.slavic.pitt.edu/~tales/02-1/plagiarism.html. I will give a grade of ‘F’ to any student who submits plagiarized work for this course.

Ethics – Spring 2007 -- Schedule of assignments

Date to be discussed	Reading
Wednesday, Jan. 31	Introductory session
Friday, Feb. 2	Rachels on euthanasia, Applied Ethics, pp.166-171
Monday, Feb. 5	Mill, Utilitarianism, to p.12
Wednesday. Feb. 7	Mill, Utilitarianism, to p.26 (end of Chapter 2)
Friday, Feb. 19	Mill, Utilitarianism, to p.41 (Chapters 3 and 4)
Monday, Feb. 12	Kant Grounding…, Section 1
Wednesday, Feb. 14	Kant Grounding…, Section 2, through page 33
Friday, Feb. 16	Kant Grounding…, Section 2, pp. 33-48
Monday, Feb. 19	Mill, Utilitarianism, Chapter 5
Wednesday, Feb. 21	Intro to chapter on capital punishment in Applied Ethics, pp.238-247 and article by Bedau pp.248-259
Friday, Feb. 23	Articles by van den Haag (pp.260-265) and Primoratz (pp.284-294) in Applied Ethics
Monday, Feb. 26	Amsterdam in Applied Ethics, pp.277-283
Wednesday, Feb. 28	Singer in Applied Ethics, pp.358-368
Friday, March 2	Hardin in Applied Ethics, pp.369-380
Monday, March 5	Van Wyk in Applied Ethics, pp.381-390
Wednesday, March 7	Hospers, in Applied Ethics, pp. 311-322
Friday, March 9	Govier, in Applied Ethics, pp. 328-341;
Monday March 12	Rawls in Applied Ethics, pp. 38-44 (skip the last section of this selection) plus more Rawls in a handout
Wednesday, March 14	Review 1^st paper due
Friday, March 16	Mid-term Exam
March 17-25	Spring Break
Monday, March 26	Aristotle, Nichomachean Ethics, Book I
Wednesday, March 28	Aristotle, Nichomachean Ethics, Book II
Friday, March 30	Aristotle, Nichomachean Ethics, Book III and Book IV (as much as you can stand)
Monday, April 2	Aristotle, Nichomachean Ethics, Book VI
Wednesday, April 4	Aristotle, Nichomachean Ethics, Book X
Friday, April 6	No class
Monday, April 9	Aristotle, Nichomachean Ethics, Books VIII and IX
Wednesday, April 11	Philippa Foot, Virtues and Vices in Applied Ethics pp. 50-58
Friday, April 13	Alan Soble, Philosophy of Sexuality, sections 6 ("Sexual Perversion") through 13 (Natural Law vs. Liberal Ethics) online; Levin in Applied Ethics, pp.675-680
Monday, April 16	Kaplan in Applied Ethics, pp.681-690
Wednesday, April 18	Sherwin in Applied Ethics, pp.59-69
Friday, April 20	Warren in Applied Ethics, pp.88-98
Monday, April 23	Marquis in Applied Ethics, pp.99-110
Wednesday, April 25	Mackenzie in Applied Ethics, pp.120-133
Friday, April 27	Wolf-Devine in Applied Ethics, pp.145-155
Monday, April 30	Introduction to Chapter 8 pp.539-540 and Mill in Applied Ethics, pp.550-558
Wednesday, May 2	Introduction to Chapter 8 pp.541-546 and Lynn, in Applied Ethics, pp. 559-568
Friday, May 4	Gastil, in Applied Ethics, pp. 569-579
Monday, May 7	Langton, in Applied Ethics, pp.602-625
Wednesday, May 9	Lawrence, in Applied Ethics, pp.639-652
Friday, May 11	Review; 2nd paper due
Monday, May 14, 10:00 AM	Final Exam (in our regular classroom)