PHL 250 Philosophical Foundations for Ethical Understanding
Dr. Kevin Graham, Instructor
Fall Semester 2002
Humanities Center, Room 113
kgraham@creighton.edu
280-1219
Class Meetings. Section A: M W F 9:30-10:20 am in Administration, Room 432
Section B: M W F 10:30-11:20 am in Administration, Room 432
Office Hours. M Tu W Th F 2:30-3:20 pm
or by appointment
Course Description
We constantly confront situations that require us to determine which actions are right or just, and which are wrong or unjust. You already have more or less coherent ideas about what is right, good, and just, and a more or less well-developed ability to make moral judgments. This course is designed to help you reflect on and refine these ideas and this ability so that you can make better ethical choices and lead a more moral life. We will address questions such as the following: Why should you do what is morally right when it is not in your self-interest to do so? How can you determine what course of action is morally right? How should you balance your duty to act as morally as you can with responsibilities such as being a good friend or being a faithful employee?
Because this course begins from the moral ideas and moral judgment that you have acquired over the course of your life rather than with abstract philosophical theories about morality, the central reading in this course is a novel rather than a series of philosophical essays. As we read the novel together, we will discuss moral questions like those listed above as they arise. Alongside this novel we will read a sociological study that will explain a lot of the background information that is necessary to understand the industry in which the novel's characters work. And at certain key junctures in our study of the novel, we will read a few philosophical essays that will help you to clarify your moral ideas and hone your moral judgment.
Course Goals
Required Texts
Bebe Moore Campbell, Brothers and Sisters (Berkley)
Melvin L. Oliver & Thomas M. Shapiro, Black Wealth/White Wealth (Routledge)
Louis P. Pojman, ed., Moral Philosophy: A Reader, second ed. (Hackett)
Grading Scheme
Academic Policies
Absence Policy. It is not my policy formally to take attendance at each class meeting. The class participation and writing exercise requirements are, however, partly intended to ensure your regular attendance. In accordance with University policy, "conscientious attendance of classes" is considered a necessary condition of successful completion of this course (CU Bulletin, Undergraduate Issue: 2002, p. 85). Consequently, if you receive a grade of F on either the class participation or the informal writing exercise component of your grade due to excessive absences, then you will receive a grade of AF for the course.
Deadlines and Petitions for Extensions and Make-up Quizzes and Exams. All deadlines for submission of course work are firm. Late papers will not be accepted unless you have successfully petitioned for an extension of the deadline before the deadline arrives. Petitions for extensions of essay deadlines will be considered IF AND ONLY IF (1) you give a compelling reason why circumstances beyond your control prevent you from submitting the paper on time AND (2) you request an extension in writing by the deadline specified in the essay handout. After that date, no requests for extensions will be considered. If you submit your essay late without previously having obtained an extension, your essay will not be accepted and you will receive a grade of zero for the assignment.
If you miss an exam or a quiz due to reasons beyond your control, then you can arrange to take a make-up exam or quiz by contacting the instructor as soon as possible, and no more than 24 hours after the scheduled time of the exam or quiz. In order to obtain permission to take a make-up exam or quiz, you need to provide documentary proof of the circumstances that prevented you from writing the exam or quiz at the scheduled time within 5 business days of the scheduled time. If you fail to contact the instructor within 24 hours or to provide evidence of what prevented you from taking the test within 5 business days, then you will receive a grade of zero for that quiz or exam.
Academic Honesty. If you present the words or thoughts of another person as if they were your own, you are guilty of plagiarism. This is true whether or not you intended to pass off the words or thoughts in question as your own. You are also guilty of plagiarism if you present the same work for credit in two different university courses.
Plagiarism is an extremely serious academic offense. Penalties for plagiarism can range from getting a zero on the assignment in question through getting an F in the course to being expelled from the university. Generally speaking, my policy is to penalize acts of academic dishonesty by assigning a grade of F for the course, although I reserve the right to assign a lesser penalty (such as assigning a grade of zero for the assignment) or to appeal to the Dean to assign a greater penalty (such as expulsion from the university) at my discretion. Whatever penalty I assign, you should know that every act of academic dishonesty, however small or large, is recorded in a letter placed in the student’s permanent academic file in the College of Arts & Sciences.
Plagiarism is also relatively easy for the experienced instructor to spot, so it is difficult to get away with. This is especially true now that instructors have access to technology for detecting plagiarism that is on a par with the technology students have for committing plagiarism. By taking this course, students agree that all required papers may be subject to submission for textual similarity review to Turnitin.com for the detection of plagiarism. All submitted papers will be included as source documents in the Turnitin.com reference database solely for the purpose of detecting plagiarism of such papers. Use of the Turnitin.com service is subject to the terms of use agreement posted on the Turnitin.com Web site. I will submit your essay to Turnitin.com for evaluation if I judge that your essay does not respond to the assignment stated in the essay handout or if I detect specific evidence of knowledge or styles of expression not generally accessible to undergraduate students.
Given the severe penalties you may incur as a result of plagiarism and the high risk of getting caught, it is wise to do all in your power to avoid committing plagiarism knowingly or unknowingly. The best way to avoid plagiarism is to be as thorough as possible in documenting the sources you rely on for the claims you make in your papers. Detailed guidelines for documenting your sources will be supplied on the assignment sheets for each of the essays in this course.
The most common reasons for plagiarism are (1) carelessness or laziness in providing page references to sources, (2) confusion about just when documentation is and is not required, and (3) feeling overwhelmed or intimidated by the difficulty of an assignment. If you feel prone to any of these feelings, reflect for a minute on the fact that I am highly likely to see right through your attempt to get by without documentation, and consider what the consequences may be if you are caught. And remember, I am always happy to talk to you about any and all issues related to plagiarism, and especially about concerns (2) and (3) listed above.
Criteria for Evaluating
Philosophy Essays
Appropriateness.
Does your essay answer each of the questions stated in the handout you received in class? Will it be obvious to the reader what your answers are to each of those questions?Clarity of exposition and argument. How clearly have you explained the arguments and concepts from the course material that are relevant to the assignment? How clearly have you expressed your critical evaluation of the arguments contained in the readings? Have you clearly stated the reasons behind your evaluations?
Critical understanding of the material. Have you demonstrated a detailed, thorough understanding of the relevant course readings? Is there any important part of an argument that you have not considered? Do your accounts of the arguments make sense in light of what you know about the larger context in which they are set?
Fairness to the authors' arguments. Are your interpretations of the authors’ arguments charitable? Have you done your best to interpret them as good, strong arguments? If you think a certain argument is badly flawed, can you identify any beliefs that the author may have held which would make the argument stronger than you first thought? If you have expressed doubts about whether a certain premise of the author’s argument is true, have you supplied an argument to show that that premise is probably or certainly false?
Coherence of your explanations and arguments. Does your essay make sense as a whole? Is it well-organized? At each stage of the essay, is it easy to tell what you are saying and how that fits in with what you have already said? Are there any conflicts between things you say at different points in the essay? Do your arguments flow logically from your premises to your conclusions?
Ability to anticipate objections to your point of view. Have you considered how the authors of the articles you discuss (or someone else who read your essay and disagreed with you) might respond to your arguments? Are your arguments open to any obvious objections? Have you committed any glaring errors of reasoning? Are any of the assumptions you make obviously false?
Documentation of works cited. Have you noted where you refer to the work of writers other than yourself? Have you included page numbers in parentheses in the text of your essay to mark where you refer to works on the course syllabus? Have you included full endnotes or footnotes to mark where you refer to works other than those on the course syllabus? Have you included a bibliography listing all the bibliographical information about books you refer to that are not on the course syllabus?
Interpretations of Letter Grades
F "Failure – no credit"
D "Work of inferior quality, but passing"
C "Satisfactory work"
B "Noteworthy level of performance"
Demonstrates all of the qualities of average work, as well as:
A "Outstanding achievement and an unusual degree of intellectual initiative"
Demonstrates all of the qualities of above average work, as well as:
Standards of Evaluation for
Participation in Class Discussions
F - infrequent class attendance
- little or no participation in class discussions
D - irregular class attendance
- limited participation in class discussions
C - regular class attendance
- limited participation in class discussions
B - regular class attendance
- regular participation in class discussions
A - regular class attendance
- regular participation in class discussions
- frequent thoughtful, insightful, or provocative contributions to class discussions
Standards of Evaluation for
Informal Writing Exercises
F - Completion of none or practically none of the informal writing exercises
D - Completion of few of the informal writing exercises
- All or most of those completed are of poor or fair quality (Ö -)
C - Completion of most of the informal writing exercises
- Most of those completed are of poor or fair quality (Ö -)
B - Completion of all or most of the informal writing exercises
- Most of those completed are of good (Ö ) quality
A - Completion of all or practically all of the informal writing exercises
- All or practically all of those completed are of good quality (Ö )
Percentile Equivalents of Letter Grades
A = 93-100 C+ = 77-81
B+ = 88-92 C = 70-76
B = 82-87 D = 60-69
F = 0-59
|
Schedule of Required Readings |
|
|
Date |
Reading |
|
Aug. 21 |
Introduction |
|
Aug. 23 |
Campbell, Brothers & Sisters, Chapters 1-3, pp. 1-42 |
|
Aug. 26 |
Campbell, Brothers & Sisters, Chapters 4-7, pp. 43-91 |
|
Aug. 28 |
Jeremy Bentham, "Classical Hedonism," in Pojman, Moral Philosophy, pp. 113-15 |
|
Aug. 30 |
John Stuart Mill, "Utilitarianism," in Pojman, Moral Philosophy, pp. 141-43 |
Sept. 2 |
Labor Day – No class meeting |
|
Sept. 4 |
Campbell, Brothers & Sisters, Chapters 8-10, pp. 92-141 |
|
Sept. 6 |
John Stuart Mill, "Utilitarianism," in Pojman, Moral Philosophy, pp. 144-46 |
|
Sept. 9 |
Wrap-up discussion of Utilitarianism |
Sept. 11 |
Mass of the Holy Spirit – No class meeting |
|
Sept. 13 |
Campbell, Brothers & Sisters, Chapters 11-14, pp. 142-97 |
|
Sept. 16 |
Immanuel Kant, "The Foundations of Ethics," in Pojman, Moral Philosophy, pp. 194-97 |
|
Sept. 18 |
Immanuel Kant, "The Foundations of Ethics," in Pojman, Moral Philosophy, pp. 197-201 |
|
Sept. 20 |
Campbell, Brothers & Sisters, Chapters 15-17, pp. 198-247 |
|
Sept. 23 |
Immanuel Kant, "The Foundations of Ethics," in Pojman, Moral Philosophy, pp. 201-05 |
|
Sept. 25 |
Immanuel Kant, "The Foundations of Ethics," in Pojman, Moral Philosophy, pp. 205-08 |
|
Sept. 27 |
Oliver & Shapiro, Black Wealth/White Wealth, Introduction and Chapter 1, pp. 1-32 |
|
Sept. 30 |
Immanuel Kant, "The Foundations of Ethics," in Pojman, Moral Philosophy, pp. 208-212 |
|
Oct. 2 |
Wrap-up discussion of Deontology |
|
Oct. 4 |
Minor Essay Workshop |
|
Oct. 7 |
Oliver & Shapiro, Black Wealth/White Wealth, Chapter 2, pp. 33-52 |
|
Oct. 9 |
Campbell, Brothers & Sisters, Chapters 18-22, pp. 248-301 Quiz on Oliver & Shapiro, Introduction and Chapters 1-2 |
|
Oct. 11 |
Minor Essay due |
Oct. 14-18 |
Fall Break – No class meetings |
|
Oct. 21 |
Campbell, Brothers & Sisters, Chapters 23-25, pp. 302-48 |
|
Oct. 23 |
Major Essay Workshop #1 |
|
Oct. 25 |
Campbell, Brothers & Sisters, Chapters 26-29, pp. 349-98 |
|
Oct. 28 |
Oliver & Shapiro, Black Wealth/White Wealth, Chapter 5, pp. 91-111 |
|
Oct. 30 |
Campbell, Brothers & Sisters, Chapters 30-34, pp. 399-450 |
|
Nov. 1 |
Oliver & Shapiro, Black Wealth/White Wealth, Chapter 5, pp. 111-25 |
|
Nov. 4 |
Major Essay Workshop #2 |
|
Nov. 6 |
Oliver & Shapiro, Black Wealth/White Wealth, Chapter 6, pp. 127-51 |
|
Nov. 8 |
Instructor away at conference – No class meeting |
Nov. 11 |
Campbell, Brothers & Sisters, Chapters 35-40, pp. 451-506 |
|
Nov. 13 |
Campbell, Brothers & Sisters, Chapters 41-44, pp. 507-44 |
|
Nov. 15 |
Oliver & Shapiro, Black Wealth/White Wealth, Chapter 6, pp. 151-70 |
|
Nov. 18 |
Quiz on Oliver & Shapiro, Chapters 5-6 |
|
Nov. 20 |
Aristotle, "Virtue Ethics," in Pojman, Moral Philosophy, pp. 249-52 Major Essay due |
|
Nov. 22 |
Aristotle, "Virtue Ethics," in Pojman, Moral Philosophy, pp. 252-56 |
Nov. 25 |
Aristotle, "Virtue Ethics," in Pojman, Moral Philosophy, pp. 256-59 |
|
Nov. 27-29 |
Thanksgiving Break – No class meetings |
|
Dec. 2 |
Bernard Mayo, "Virtue and the Moral Life," in Pojman, Moral Philosophy, pp. 260-63 |
|
Dec. 4 |
Wrap-up discussion of Virtue Ethics |
|
Dec. 6 |
Final Exam review |
|
Dec. 9 |
Section A: Final Exam, 10:00-11:40 am |
|
Dec. 13 |
Section B: Final Exam, 8:00-9:40 am |