JCU Logo
JOHN CABOT UNIVERSITY

COURSE CODE: "PH 235-2"
COURSE NAME: "Ethics"
SEMESTER & YEAR: Spring 2022
SYLLABUS

INSTRUCTOR: Annette Merle Bryson
EMAIL: [email protected]
 HOURS: TTH 10:00AM 11:15 AM
TOTAL NO. OF CONTACT HOURS: 45
CREDITS: 3
PREREQUISITES:
OFFICE HOURS:
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
What is right and wrong, good and bad? How do we know? How can we argue over ethical issues? This course introduces students to ethical thinking by studying both concrete ethical issues and more abstract ethical ideas and theories. Students will examine philosophical debates over issues such as free speech, genetic engineering, and friendship, explore the meaning of ideas like “duty,” “virtue,” and “happiness,” and analyze the arguments of philosophers like Aristotle, Kant, and Singer.
SUMMARY OF COURSE CONTENT:

This course offers a systematic introduction to moral theory, aimed at equipping students with the concepts and tools needed to analyze moral problems and develop their own moral thinking. We will explore some important moral philosophers and their views, we will explore the relation between morality and religion, and we will apply moral thinking to moral questions in our everyday lives.
LEARNING OUTCOMES:

By the end of this course, you will have gained: 

• a better understanding of some of the moral issues of current relevance and the ways in which we might examine them;
• a better understanding of the basic questions of ethics, and of the range of philosophical answers that have been given;
• a better understanding of some of the moral issues of current relevance and the ways in which we might examine them;
• a better understanding of the shortcomings and strengths of these various approaches to answering these fundamental questions; 
• a refinement of your own critical reasoning and argumentative skills; 
• a refinement of your capacities to recognize and assess philosophical arguments;
• an enhancement of the conceptual tools we need to develop and defend our own philosophical views;
• a refinement of your abilities to defend and express philosophical positions in a clear, well-reasoning way through both writing and conversation; 
• the (re)discovery of the joy of philosophical inquiry! 
TEXTBOOK:
NONE
REQUIRED RESERVED READING:
NONE

RECOMMENDED RESERVED READING:
NONE
GRADING POLICY
-ASSESSMENT METHODS:
AssignmentGuidelinesWeight
Class ParticipationYou will receive a participation grade at the end of the semester reflecting your class attendance as well as your preparedness, contribution to in-class discussion, and participation in smaller group activities. 20%
Quizzes You will be expected to take a quiz at least once a week. All quizzes will be posted to Moodle and will be taken at home. 20%
First Written AssignmentThis written assignment will be a “take-home” assignment of 900-1200 words, written in response to one of a selection of questions which I will provide.20%
Second Written AssignmentThis written assignment will be a “take-home” assignment of 900-1200 words, written in response to one of a selection of questions which I will provide.20%
Final Exam Any material discussed in readings or in class during the semester is eligible to appear on the exam.20%

-ASSESSMENT CRITERIA:
AWork of this quality directly addresses the question or problem raised and provides a coherent argument displaying an extensive knowledge of relevant information or content. This type of work demonstrates the ability to critically evaluate concepts and theory and has an element of novelty and originality. There is clear evidence of a significant amount of reading beyond that required for the course.
BThis is highly competent level of performance and directly addresses the question or problem raised.There is a demonstration of some ability to critically evaluatetheory and concepts and relate them to practice. Discussions reflect the student’s own arguments and are not simply a repetition of standard lecture andreference material. The work does not suffer from any major errors or omissions and provides evidence of reading beyond the required assignments.
CThis is an acceptable level of performance and provides answers that are clear but limited, reflecting the information offered in the lectures and reference readings.
DThis level of performances demonstrates that the student lacks a coherent grasp of the material.Important information is omitted and irrelevant points included.In effect, the student has barely done enough to persuade the instructor that s/he should not fail.
FThis work fails to show any knowledge or understanding of the issues raised in the question. Most of the material in the answer is irrelevant.
-ATTENDANCE REQUIREMENTS:

You are expected to attend class.
ACADEMIC HONESTY
As stated in the university catalog, any student who commits an act of academic dishonesty will receive a failing grade on the work in which the dishonesty occurred. In addition, acts of academic dishonesty, irrespective of the weight of the assignment, may result in the student receiving a failing grade in the course. Instances of academic dishonesty will be reported to the Dean of Academic Affairs. A student who is reported twice for academic dishonesty is subject to summary dismissal from the University. In such a case, the Academic Council will then make a recommendation to the President, who will make the final decision.
STUDENTS WITH LEARNING OR OTHER DISABILITIES
John Cabot University does not discriminate on the basis of disability or handicap. Students with approved accommodations must inform their professors at the beginning of the term. Please see the website for the complete policy.
SCHEDULE

NOTE: This syllabus is intended to give you guidance in what may be covered during the semester. I reserve the right to modify, supplement, and make changes as the course needs arise. 

 

Class schedule and topics

 

Week 1:  Welcome to class; Introduction to ethics and to each other

 

The aim of life

Week 2:  The Immoralist’s challenge: Plato, Republic, Book II (excerpt)

            Moral objectivism vs. relativism: James Rachels, “The Challenge of Cultural Relativism”  

 

Week 3: Moral facts and their grounding: Plato, Euthyphro (excerpt)

            Virtue as the aim of life: Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics (excerpt)

 

Consequentialism and its critics  

Week 4:  J.S. Mill, “In Defense of Utilitarianism”

            Robert Nozick, “The Experience Machine”

            Russ Shafer-Landau, “Consequentialism: its Difficulties” 

 

Deontological ethics  

Week 5: Kant, “The Moral Law and the Autonomy of the Will” 

            Onora “ONeil, “Kant on Treating People as Ends in Themselves” 

            Ross, “What Makes Right Acts Right?” 

 

Virtue ethics  

Week 6: Aristotle, Nichomachean Ethics (excerpt)

Martha Nussbaum, “Non-Relative Virtues: An Aristotelian Approach”

 

Week 7: Mid-term projects

 

Week 8   Rosalind Hursthouse, “Normative Virtue Ethics” 

Nell Noddings, “An Ethics of Caring”

 

The ethics of trust

Week 9: Annette Baier, “Trust and Anti-Trust”  

            [TBD]

The ethics of belief

Week 10: Rima Basu, “The Wrongs of Racist Beliefs

Mark Schroeder, “When Beliefs Wrong”

Week 11: Miranda Fricker, Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing (excerpt)

  Sarah Stroud, “Epistemic Partiality and the Duties of Friendship” 

 

Morality and our lives (a case study) 

Week 12: Don Marquis, “Why Abortion is Immoral”

             Judith Jarvis Thomson, “A Defense of Abortion”

Week 13: Margaret Little, “The Moral Permissibility of Abortion”

             Shannon Dea, “Fetal Life, Abortion and Harm Reduction” 

Alison Jaggar, “Abortion Rights and Gender Justice Worldwide”

Week 14: In-class activities and final exam preparation