| Winter 2008: | MWF 11:50-1:05, Upjohn Library 307 |
| Instructor: | Prof.
Ashley McDowell
|
| Office: | 202 Humphrey House |
| Office phone: | 337-7077 |
| email: | mcdowell[at]kzoo.edu or ashley.mcdowell[at]gmail.com |
| Office hours: | MWF 1:15-2:15, Tues 2:00-3:00, and by appointment |
| Texts: | Jay F. Rosenberg, Three
Conversations about Knowing
Articles made available
electronically
Coursepack
|
| Note on Moodle: | this course website will include useful information – go to https://moodle.kzoo.edu/ and find our course, and get yourself logged on. |
| Note on email: | I will be sending mail to the class alias,
which only knows your K email address. Make sure your K email is forwarded to whatever email account you use
regularly, if it’s something else.
|
Description:
This is an introductory course exploring some issues
in epistemology – the study of knowledge and what we call “justified
belief” – belief that is warranted, acceptable, or entitled. We’ll be reading scholarly philosophical
articles to get a general feel for some of the major issues in this subfield of
philosophy, and to examine some debates in detail.
The main question you should have in mind as we move
through this course is the one that ties it all together:
What is it to believe well?
Course
Goals:
I want you to learn how to do philosophy, and
epistemology in particular; to gain appreciation for epistemology and its
issues and arguments; and to learn the views and arguments of the specific
academic philosophers we’ll study.
Most of all, though, I want you to make progress on
your own views regarding what it is to believe well. This is not a spectator class – you are
expected to change as a result of studying this material.
Although the difficult material we’ll be reading
will mean I’ll have to do a good bit of outright lecturing, I also intend to engage
in as much discussion as possible, and all students will be expected to
contribute. I may sometimes have you
break up into pairs or groups to work on an in-class assignment or discussion. Since philosophical learning is best done in
an environment of discussion, attendance and participation are expected. In-class discussions will be conducted with
respect and a mutual interest in solving these problems, so that all views will
be open to thoughtful criticism. We will be approaching other views – and our
own – with an open-minded but critical eye.
The focus will be on providing and assessing arguments for
positions, to try to come to the most thoughtful position possible on these
questions. Students will be evaluated
on how well you have learned the views and arguments of the authors studied,
and how well you formulate original arguments for your own positions.
You will be responsible for completing the readings
before each class, and being prepared to discuss those readings. You should be aware that some of the
readings in this course most likely will be quite challenging for you. Give yourself plenty of time to do these
readings carefully. Those who want to
truly excel in this class will want to read each assignment at least twice,
and take notes on the readings (before and after class works well for many
people). I will sometimes provide study questions to guide your reading. You must bring with you to class whatever
text(s) we are working on for that day and the one before, any homework or
assignment due that day, and any study or reading questions I might have
provided.
progress on questions
like:
Quizzes
on terminology and concepts: 25%
In approximately weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10, we’ll
have brief in-class quizzes on the terminology and concepts that have come up
since the last quiz. I recommend you
keep a special section of your notes to work on terms and concepts that come up
as we go along. I’ll give you more
information about this as we go, and will point out terms and concepts that are
being used as “terms of art” or that are being defined in important ways.
Reflections
essays: 25%
In approximately weeks 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9, you’ll turn in reflections essays on the material we’ve been covering. I’ll provide a series of questions to focus you and launch your reflection. You should attempt to address the issues I raise, but your entry may or may not directly answer every question. The entry should not be a series of my questions and your answers, but should be a synthesized response.
Your personal experiences are a crucial part of your
reflections, but these experiences must be subject to your analysis and should
make comparisons and connections to our readings. Be ready to devote meaningful time to writing these essays. I do not expect polished papers, with things
like thesis statements and conclusions.
Rather, I’m looking for good quality, thorough reflections that include
consideration of deeper implications as well as appropriate and effective
references to the readings. I’m also
looking for genuine engagement and effort to make connections – think about
whether your writing reveals the risks that lead to striking insights.[1]
Final
paper: 30%
You
will turn in a 10-12 page paper during exam week. This paper will be an argument, using the course material, about
what each of two characters or people chosen by you ought to do,
epistemically, or what’s involved in their believing well or poorly. You will choose your two figures at the
beginning of Week 2, in consultation with me, and keep a journal or notes
applying the readings to your cases as we move through the quarter. On specific, announced days, I’ll have you
check in with me or your classmates on the progress of this project.
Participation
and demonstrated preparedness: 20%
Participation is expected. In a philosophy class of this kind, discussion is absolutely essential,
and may be the way you learn most about the material. I know that participation is difficult for some people, but you
can consider this a safe place to practice contributing to a group discussion,
which you will surely need to do throughout your life.
I will keep general track of your contributions in
class. Keep in mind that contributions
can take various forms, including asking for clarification, participation in
group work, and giving helpful examples.
Keep in mind also that more does not necessarily mean better: those who
excessively dominate discussions, speak disrespectfully, or otherwise use their
voices in a negative way may be penalized for doing so. If you are in doubt, or if you are interested
in advice about how to participate more effectively or more easily, ask me.
Demonstrated preparedness includes evidence of your
having read the assignments carefully, thought about and tried to answer any
study questions or tasks I’ve given, prepared questions or comments in advance
of class, and kept up with ongoing work on terms and concepts, and on your
final paper project.
Again, if you want to know how you’re doing on this,
or want to talk about how to do this well, get in touch with me.
Assignment
responsibilities:
All assignments must be turned in as hard (paper)
copies – no emailed assignments will be accepted except by special
permission. It is your responsibility
to retain copies of all assignments you turn in, in a reliable format.
Late assignments and missed quizzes for which you do
not have a strong, documented excuse will be assessed a penalty of at least 10%
reduction in grade, or more if significantly late. Let me know right away if you’re turning something in late or
missing class, and we’ll work out the details.
A note on changing grades: if you feel you have been
assigned a grade unfairly or inaccurately, you should by all means talk to me
about it. My only requirement is that
you prepare an argument (a set of reasons and facts) before you do so.
Academic
integrity and the Honor System
“It
is always important to think of the intellectual world as a community of mutual
dependence, mutual helpfulness, mutual protectiveness, and common delight. We take ideas from others and we give them
to others. We are indebted to others,
and others are indebted to us. In
sharing and acknowledging the community, we define ourselves more certainly as
individuals. The ability to describe
our sources is also an ability to define our own originality and our own
selves. All communities depend on
generosity, trust, definition, and the proper use of sources is part of the
mortar that holds the community of the mind together.”
-
Richard
Marius, Expository Writing Program, Harvard University
In this class, as in all classes at Kalamazoo
College, we will be operating under the Honor System. It is important that you familiarize yourself with that
system. You should also familiarize
yourself with proper procedures for collaborating, doing research, and citing
sources. I expect each of you to visit
my read the essay on the Moodle site called “Plagiarism and How to Avoid
It.” Should you have any questions
about citations, plagiarism, or honor system issues, please visit or contact
me.
Any assignment you turn in that I find to violate
academic integrity, either through dishonesty, plagiarism, lack of appropriate
citations, or unauthorized collaboration, will receive a grade of 0. Any further instance of a violation of
academic integrity will be punished by a failing grade in the class as a minimum
sanction.[2]
If you have any special needs that I can
accommodate, please let me know as soon as possible.
Office
hours
My office hours are posted above. They will be conducted on a first-come,
first-served basis, and by appointment, with appointments taking
precedence. You should feel absolutely
free to come to them and discuss the course, the material, the assignments, or
philosophy.
A
note on reading: don’t succumb to the misconception that in order
to read something you only have to move your eyes over the lines, or “read it
out loud in your head,” so to speak.
What I expect is that you will read the material in a more sophisticated
way, thinking as you go. You should be
asking yourself the main points, making sure you understand the structure of
the reading, thinking about how this reading relates to others you’ve done, and
otherwise working to comprehend the material, not just to complete a
technical “reading” of it. You might
try highlighting, underlining, making margin notes, or outlining – whatever
helps you focus and understand.
This schedule is tentative. Any changes will be announced in class and by email. The reading assignments listed for each day must be completed before that class. Readings must be brought physically to class.
W read and do “The
Philosophical Health Check”
F Rosenberg, The First Conversation
M Rosenberg, The Second Conversation
W Rosenberg, The Third Conversation
F Descartes, from Meditations on the First Philosophy
W Williams, “Skepticism”
F Williams continued; Pollock & Cruz, “Skeptical
Problems”
WEEK FOUR
M Moore, “Proof of an External World” and “Hume’s Theory
Examined;” Pryor, “What’s Wrong with Moore’s Argument?”
W BonJour, “The Concept of Epistemic Justification”
F Foley, “Skepticism and Rationality”
WEEK FIVE
M Alston, “The Deontological Conception of Epistemic
Justification”
W Heil, “Doxastic Agency”
F Church, “Taking It to Heart”
WEEK SIX
M Feldman, “The Ethics of Belief”
W Feldman contd
F Christensen, “Rationality and Deontology”
M Elgin, “True Enough”
W Bach, “A Rationale for Reliabilism”
F Sosa, “Skepticism and the Internal/External Divide”
WEEK EIGHT
M Goldman, “Internalism Exposed”
W Feldman & Conee, “Internalism Defended”
F Bergmann, “Deontology and Defeat”
M Goldman, “Strong and Weak
Justification”
W Stevenson, “First-person
Justification”
F NO CLASS
M Kornblith, “Distrusting Reason”
W Huemer, “Is Critical Thinking Epistemically Rational?”
F McDowell, “Epistemological Expertise”