Course Syllabus

JOHN CABOT UNIVERSITY

COURSE CODE: "PH 235-1"
COURSE NAME: "Ethics"
SEMESTER & YEAR: Spring 2025

SYLLABUS

INSTRUCTOR: Tom Bailey
EMAIL: [email protected]
HOURS: TTH 8:30 AM 9:45 AM
TOTAL NO. OF CONTACT HOURS: 45
CREDITS: 3
PREREQUISITES:
OFFICE HOURS: By appointment, Tues. and Thurs., 8 a.m. - 6 p.m.

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:

What is “love”? What and how do we love? How does love change us? What are our ethical responsibilities in love? How do we love our friends, romantic and sexual partners, and parents and children differently? Why should we love at all? On this course, we will explore ethics by considering questions about love such as these. We will examine specific kinds of love, concrete ethical issues about them, and more abstract philosophical questions that they raise. Thus, for instance, we will study arguments about romantic union and children’s autonomy, issues raised by “love drugs” and by sexual consent, and related questions about the self, rationality, responsibility, and the nature of ethical values. Our focus throughout will be on your own views and on how you can reflect on, develop, and defend them by engaging with philosophical ideas and arguments and with concrete examples, in class and in writing.

The course is divided into three main parts, each focusing on a particular kind of love. The first part focuses on romantic love: here we will examine different conceptions of romantic love, how conceptions may be flexible, and issues such as gender, exclusivity, and “love drugs.” The second part focuses on sex, and particularly on whether sex ought to have “meaning,” the nature of consent, and issues such as discrimination, prostitution, and objectification. The final part of the course focuses on parents and children: here we will explore the decision to have children, parents’ and children’s responsibilities to each other, and issues such as adoption, genetic engineering, and whether being a child is better or worse than being an adult.

After the first and second parts of the course, you will prepare a written assignment, and after the third we will review for the final exam. For the last week of each part of the course, we will decide together which topics to examine and hold a more structured group debate on one of them, two of which you will participate in as a member of a group. Throughout the semester you will also be assessed by your participation in classes and your contributions to forums and other exercises on the class Moodle site.

LEARNING OUTCOMES:

By the end of the course you will be able to:

• explain and evaluate important concepts and arguments in the philosophy of love;

• reflectively analyze and develop your own reasoned views of them;

• understand and interpret primary and secondary philosophical texts;

• do all this in appropriately academic oral and written forms, individually and in groups.

TEXTBOOK:

NONE

REQUIRED RESERVED READING:

NONE

RECOMMENDED RESERVED READING:

NONE

GRADING POLICY
-ASSESSMENT METHODS:

Assignment	Guidelines	Weight
Class participation	Classes will involve a mixture of discussions, lectures, pair and group work, debates, and other activities. The emphasis will be on helping you to develop your own opinions and arguments and your ability to discuss them with others, as well as your understanding of the materials, issues, and relevant concepts, positions, and arguments. Your active involvement in discussions and other class activities, based on adequate preparation outside class, is therefore essential. I will give you a percentage grade for each class, and the average of these grades will constitute your final participation grade.	20%
Exercises	Since the exercises are intended to allow for free discussion, I will not assess the content of your contributions. Your grade for this assessment will be simply the percentage of times that you complete an exercise by 8 a.m. on the day of the relevant class, out of the total classes. You may also miss up to two exercises unexcused without this affecting your grade.	10%
Two written assignments	The written assignments will be “take-home” assignments of 1400-1600 words. You will write one after each of the first two parts of the course. I will give you a set of questions from which to choose on the last Thursday of the relevant part of the course, although you may also agree an alternative question with me. The assignment will be due a week later, at the end of the writing week.	20% each
Debates	For two of the three more structured debates we will hold, you will defend a position as a member of a group. Your group’s performance in the debate will be evaluated according to the understanding and critical thinking displayed, the quality of responses given in the discussion, and the delivery of the points. Each member of the group will receive the same debate grade.	5% each
Final examination	The cumulative final examination will consist of an essay written under examination conditions. The questions will be distributed on Thursday of week 13 and at the examination, which will take place in week 15, you will be given a selection of these questions to choose one from.	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:

A maximum of two unexcused absences from class will be accepted. Beyond this, a zero grade will be given for each unexcused absence, bringing your average grade down. It is your responsibility to inform me if you miss or cannot participate fully in a class for a good reason. Good reasons include illness, unavoidable appointments, religious holidays, and transport strikes, but not trips, guests, or malfunctioning alarm clocks. Note that arriving late to class, leaving for lengthy ‘toilet breaks’, and using a laptop or mobile phone in class also count as ‘unexcused absences’.

Note also that you may make up a missed assessment only with the permission of the Dean’s Office. This permission is granted only in cases of serious impediment – such as a documented illness, hospitalization, or attendance at an immediate family member’s funeral – and when you notify the Dean’s Office beforehand.

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

Class schedule and topics

1. Thursday: How to do philosophy & What is love?

I. Romantic love

2. Conceptions

Tuesday: Romantic union

Thursday: Is love an emotion? Is it rational?

3. Tuesday: Perception and particularity

Thursday: Conceptual engineering

4. Better love? *

Tuesday & Thursday: Exclusivity / Amorality / Love drugs / Gender roles / Dating apps & love robots + Writing workshop

5. Preparation of first written assignment

II. Sex

6. Meanings of sex

Tuesday: Casual vs. meaningful sex

Thursday: Desire and meaning

7. Consent and its limits

Tuesday: Consent and coercion

Thursday: Beyond consent

8. Better sex? *

Tuesday & Thursday: Objectification / Sexual orientation / Pornography / Prostitution / Appearance preferences

9. Preparation of second written assignment

III. Parents and children

10. Having children

Tuesday: Transformative experience

Thursday: Wrong to have a child?

11. Childhood

Tuesday: Neutral upbringing

Thursday: Children’s responsibilities

12. Better parenting? *

Tuesday & Thursday: Antinatalism / Adoption / Childhood vs. adulthood / Unconditional love / Genetic engineering / Vegetarianism

13 & 14. Review for final examination

* We will decide together which topics to discuss and debate in these weeks, from among the options indicated.

Bibliography

Below are the primary readings that we will study, arranged by class and not yet including the “better love?” weeks, the topics and readings for which we will decide together. These and other materials will be provided on the class Moodle site.

Romantic union

Robert Nozick, “Love’s Bond,” in The Examined Life: Philosophical Meditations, New York: Simon & Schuster, 1989, pp. 68-86

Is love an emotion? Is it rational?

Arina Pismenny and Jesse Prinz, “Is Love an Emotion?”, in C. Grau and A. Smuts eds., Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Love, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017, pp. 169-89

Perception and particularity

Troy Jollimore, “Love: The Vision View,” in E. Kroeker and K. Schaubroeck eds., Love, Reason and Morality, New York: Routledge, 2017, pp. 1-19

Conceptual engineering

Georgi Gardiner, “We Forge the Conditions of Love,” in C. Montemayor and A. Fairweather eds., Linguistic Luck: Essays in Anti-Luck Semantics, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2023, §§ 1-6

Casual vs. meaningful sex

David Benatar, “Two Views of Sexual Ethics: Promiscuity, Pedophilia, and Rape,” Public Affairs Quarterly 16:3, 2002, pp. 191-201

Desire and meaning

Seiriol Morgan, “Sex in the Head,” Journal of Applied Philosophy 20:1, 2003, pp. 1-16, and “Dark Desires,” Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 6, 2003, pp. 377-410, extracts

Consent and coercion

Sarah Conly, “Seduction, Rape, and Coercion,” Ethics 115, 2004, pp. 96-121

Beyond consent

Rebecca Kukla, “That’s What She Said: The Language of Sexual Negotiation,” Ethics 129, 2018, pp. 70-97

Transformative experience

L.A. Paul, “What You Can’t Expect When You’re Expecting,” Res Philosophica 92:2, 2015, pp. 149-70

Wrong to have a child?

David Benatar, “Famine, Affluence, and Procreation: Peter Singer and Anti-Natalism Lite,” Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 23, 2020, pp. 415-31, extracts, pp. 415-18, 420-22, 424-5, and 429-30

Daniel Friedrich, “A Duty to Adopt?”, Journal of Applied Philosophy 30:1, 2013, pp. 25-39

Neutral upbringing?

Matthew Clayton, “The Case against the Comprehensive Enrolment of Children,” Journal of Political Philosophy 20:3, 2012, pp. 353-64

Children’s responsibilities

Simon Keller, “Four Theories of Filial Duty,” The Philosophical Quarterly 56:223, 2006, pp. 254-74