Time & place
Tuesday & Thursday from 9:30-10:45, in 346 Grace Hall
Topic
We will begin the seminar by discussing the central arguments for and against the existence of God. The philosophical questions we discuss for the remainder of the semester will be up to the class; I'll distribute a list of questions we might discuss on the first day, and we'll decide which ones to cover then. In most cases, we'll be discussing in sequence a number of arguments for opposing views on the chosen topics. Students will be asked to understand these arguments, and form and defend their own views about which among them are most successful. We will spend a bit of time at the beginning of the course, and occasionally throughout, discussing what good arguments are, and why they might be worth pursuing.
Format
This course is a seminar rather than a lecture; classes will be be discussions of the readings, with the class and professor as participants. Accordingly, students should come to class ready to discuss the reading assigned for that day, rather than just ready to listen.Texts
Students will be required to obtain Peter van Inwagen's Metaphysics. Other readings will be made available in PDF form via links from the syllabus.Assignments
There will be four written assignments. The first will be a short 1-2 page assignment worth 10% of the grade; the next three will each be 5-7 pages in length, and worth 25% of the grade. Late papers will be penalized 3 points/day, including weekends. The remaining 15% of the grade will be given on the basis of class attendance and participation.Date | Topic | Reading | Assignments |
Tuesday, August 27 | Introduction to the course | none | |
Does God exist? | |||
Thursday, August 29 | The cosmological argument, pt 1 | Aquinas, The Five Ways | First draft of mini-paper due |
Tuesday, September 3 | The cosmological argument, pt 2 | van Inwagen, Metaphysics ch. 7 | |
Thursday, September 5 | The ontological argument | Second draft of mini-paper due | |
Tuesday, September 10 | The design argument | van Inwagen, Metaphysics chs. 8 & 9 optional readings ↓
optional readings ↑
|
|
Thursday, September 12 | The argument from miracles | Hume, "Of miracles" | |
Tuesday, September 17 | Pascal's wager | Pascal, Pensees (selection) | |
Thursday, September 19 | The problem of evil | Mackie, "Evil and omnipotence" | |
Tuesday, September 24 | The free will defense | van Inwagen, "The problem of evil" (selection) | Final draft of minipaper due |
Do we have free will? What does this mean? If everything were determined, would that make free will impossible? | |||
Thursday, September 26 | The mystery of free will | van Inwagen, Metaphysics ch. 12 | |
Tuesday, October 1 | Free will, determinism, and value | Sider, "Free will and determinism" Pereboom, "Hard incompatibilism and meaning in life" |
|
Would a perfectly good God ever send anyone to hell? | |||
Thursday, October 3 | The problem of hell | Sider, "Hell and vagueness" | |
Can I have free will even if God knows what I am going to do? | |||
Tuesday, October 8 | Fate and freedom | Taylor, "Fate" Chiang, "What's expected of us" |
|
Thursday, October 10 | Some opposing views on freedom & God's knowledge | Edwards, Freedom of the Will |
|
Is time real? Does time travel make sense? Do the past and future exist in the same way the present does? | |||
Tuesday, October 15 | Time travel & the movement of time | Sider, "Time" | |
Thursday, October 17 | Relativity and time bias | Einstein, Relativity (excerpt) Prior, "Some free thinking about time" |
First paper due |
Fall break | |||
Are actions right or wrong? What makes an action right or wrong? Should we judge acts by their consequences, or some other way? | |||
Tuesday, October 29 | Moral relativism | Rachels, "Cultural Relativism" and "Subjectivism" | |
Thursday, October 31 | Consequentialism and its critics | Mill, Utilitarianism (excerpt) Nozick, "The experience machine" |
|
Tuesday, November 5 | Kantian ethics | Kant, Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals (selection) | |
Thursday, November 7 | class canceled | ||
Selected questions in applied ethics | |||
Tuesday, November 12 | Abortion | Thomson, "A defense of abortion" Paul VI, Humanae vitae |
|
Thursday, November 14 | Capital punishment | Pojman, "A defense of the death penalty" Nathanson, "Why we should put the death penalty to rest" Catechism of the Catholic Church, §2267 |
|
Tuesday, November 19 | Assisted suicide & euthanasia | Singer, Rethinking Life and Death (excerpt) |
|
Is altruism possible, or are all actions ultimately self-interested? | |||
Thursday, November 21 | Evolution, action, and altruism | Feinberg, "Psychological egoism" Kitcher, "Biology and ethics" |
Second paper due |
Some questions about knowledge and skepticism | |||
Tuesday, November 26 | Our knowledge of the external world | ||
Thanksgiving break | |||
Tuesday, December 3 | The problem of induction | ||
What am I? | |||
Thursday, December 5 | An immaterial thing | Descartes, Meditations (selection) Jackson, "What Mary didn't know" (excerpt) |
|
Tuesday, December 10 | A material thing | van Inwagen, Metaphysics, chs. 10 & 11 | |
Thursday, December 12 | Not really a thing | Parfit, "Divided minds and the nature of persons" | Third paper due |
Grading
The midterm exam and (non-cumulative) final exam will each be worth 35% of the final grade; short take home assignments will, collectively, be worth 10%. The remaining 20% of the final grade will be given on the basis of class attendance and participation.Each assignment is required, in the sense that failure to complete one or more assignments is sufficient to fail the course.
Notre Dame has no official way of indexing numerical grades to letter grades. This is the system that will be used in this course:
A | 94+ |
A- | 90-93 |
B+ | 87-89 |
B | 83-86 |
B- | 80-82 |
C+ | 77-79 |
C | 73-76 |
C- | 70-72 |
D | 60-69 |
F | 59- |
Honor code
In all of their assignments, students are responsible for compliance with the University’s honor code, information about which is available here. You should acquaint yourself with the policies and penalties described there.Sometimes, it can be hard to know what, exactly, the honor code implies with respect to different disciplines. For this reason, the philosophy department has prepared a document explaining, using examples, what the honor code requires of students when writing a philosophy paper. I strongly recommend that you read this document, which is available here. It is possible to violate the honor code without intending to do so; the best way to avoid this is to carefully read through the philosophy department's guidelines.
If you are in doubt about what the honor code requires of you in a particular case, please ask me.