|
|
JOHN CABOT UNIVERSITY
COURSE CODE: "PH 221"
COURSE NAME: "Ways of Knowing"
SEMESTER & YEAR:
Fall 2025
|
SYLLABUS
INSTRUCTOR:
Steven Joseph Woodworth
EMAIL: [email protected]
HOURS:
TTH 1:30 PM 2:45 PM
TOTAL NO. OF CONTACT HOURS:
45
CREDITS:
3
PREREQUISITES:
OFFICE HOURS:
|
|
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
When you claim to know something, how do you know it? Maybe you saw it happen, maybe you worked it out from something you already knew, or maybe your best friend told it to you. This is a matter not just of where your belief came from, but of its justification. Is your claim really warranted? Are you someone to trust? Such questions are important socially and for all academic disciplines, and they also matter personally, forming an integral part of the examined life. This course introduces students to epistemology, the philosophical study of knowledge. It examines the nature and warrant of various ways of knowing, including direct experience, reasoning, and relying on others. Other questions explored may include how knowledge differs from opinion, faith, understanding, and certainty, what distinguishes science from other ways of knowing, what makes for a reliable source, whether we can know other minds or that we are not living in a simulation, and whether we should believe only based on the evidence, or also on other grounds.
|
SUMMARY OF COURSE CONTENT:
The course begins with the philosophical analysis of knowledge, introducing students to the traditional view that knowledge is justified, true belief, as expressed in Plato, and to the contemporary debate over whether knowledge might not instead be primitive and attitudes like belief analyzed in its terms. This is followed by three main sections, each examining a principal way of knowing: knowledge through testimony, knowledge through acquaintance, including perception, and knowledge through reasoning. Aside from introducing students to these ways of knowing, each section explores ongoing philosophical debates related to the capacities in question: respectively, epistemic standing and ethical wrongs related to testimony; whether we can know the fundamental nature of reality, including whether we can know our own or others’ mental states and whether we are in a simulation; and the nature of scientific reasoning and expertise and the status of other kinds of conviction, like faith. The course ends by considering a central question in the ethics of belief: whether one should always proportion one’s belief to the evidence, or whether instead there are legitimate pragmatic and moral grounds of belief.
|
LEARNING OUTCOMES:
In this course you will:
---analyze the nature and epistemic warrant of beliefs formed on the basis of testimony, acquaintance, and reasoning;
---reconstruct and assess the strength of relevant philosophical arguments within epistemology;
---contextualize knowledge claims, including those of science, within a larger social and ethical framework;
---work through all stages of the writing process, from the definition of a research question and bibliography and the formulation of a thesis to drafting, editing, and polishing;
---articulate and defend your claims, both orally and in written forms.
|
TEXTBOOK:
|
REQUIRED RESERVED READING:
RECOMMENDED RESERVED READING:
|
GRADING POLICY
-ASSESSMENT METHODS:
| Assignment | Guidelines | Weight |
| Class Participation | Classes will involve a mixture of lectures, seminar discussions, small 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 and arguments. Your active involvement in discussions and other class activities, based on adequate preparation outside class, is essential. | 15 |
| Forum reflection posts | There will be a forum on Moodle. Five times throughout the semester you will be responsible for posting a two-to-three paragraph reflection on the course material, on a topic of your choosing. Your original posts are due noon on Friday. Then, every week, by noon on Sunday, you should also respond to at least one other student’s reflection.
The grade is determined based on a standard of reasonable completion –– effort and engagement are what matters, rather than precision and deep understanding of the material. Full participation will be awarded a grade of "A". Grades will be lowered by two-thirds of a letter grade for missed or otherwise unacceptable original posts, and one-third of a grade for missed or otherwise unacceptable replies. You may skip two replies without penalty. | 15 |
| Midterm exam | There will be a midterm exam in week 7 covering material from the first half of the course. You will have to answer several short-form questions as well as produce a short essay. Possible questions for the essay will be provided to you a week in advance; on the exam you will be presented a small selection of these, from which you will answer one. | 20 |
| Topic paper | There will be a paper of circa 2,000 words on a topic of your choosing, in consultation with me. The only requirements are that it stems from the course material; that it engages at least one source which was not required reading; and that you keep a record of your workings. Topics and intended sources will be due at the end of week 9; the paper is due at the end of week 12. There will be an opportunity for feedback on drafts. | 25 |
| Final exam | A final exam will take place during the designated exam week. While the exam will cover material from throughout the semester, it will be biased toward the second half. Possible questions for the essay will be provided to you a week in advance; on the exam you will be presented a small selection of these, from which you will answer one. | 25 |
-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:
I expect you to come to class prepared for the day’s material. I highly recommended that you attend all classes given that the material is comprehensive by nature. Attendance will be considered in your participation grade.
You cannot make-up a major exam (midterm or final) without the permission of the Dean’s Office. The Dean’s Office will grant such permission only when the absence was caused by a serious impediment, such as a documented illness, hospitalization or death in the immediate family (in which you must attend the funeral) or other situations of similar gravity. Absences due to other meaningful conflicts, such as job interviews, family celebrations, travel difficulties, student misunderstandings or personal convenience, will not be excused. Students who will be absent from a major exam must notify the Dean’s Office prior to that exam. Absences from class due to the observance of a religious holiday will normally be excused. Individual students who will have to miss class to observe a religious holiday should notify the instructor by the end of the period to make prior arrangements for making up any work that will be missed.
The University’s attendance policy is described in the catalogue. Persistent absence or tardiness usually precludes satisfactory performance in the course and jeopardizes that part of the grade that is based on class presentation and participation. You are expected to arrive to class on time. You are responsible for all material covered by the syllabus and/or discussed in class, whether or not you are actually present in 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
|
|
|
PART I: THE ANALYSIS OF KNOWLEDGE
Week 1: Introduction to the Course and Epistemology
Tuesday 09/02: no readings
Thursday 09/04: Rae Langton, "Feminism in Epistemology: Exclusion and Objectification"
Week 2: The Analysis of Knowledge
Tuesday 09/09: Edmund Gettier, "Is Justified True Belief Knowledge?" and Anand Jayprakash Vaidya, "The Inclusion Problem in Epistemology: The Case of the Gettier Cases" (three-part APA blog post)
Thursday 09/11: Linda Zagzebski, "The Inescapability of Gettier Problems"
Week 3: The Structure of Knowledge
Tuesday 09/16: Roderick Chisholm, "The Myth of the Given"
Thursday 09/18: Donald Davidson, "A Coherence Theory of Truth and Knowledge"
Week 4: The Nature of Justification
Tuesday 09/23: Alvin I. Goldman, "What Is Justified Belief?"
Thursday 09/25: Laurence Bonjour, "Externalist Theories of Empirical Knowledge"
Friday 09/26: Make-Up Session for Thanksgiving; no assigned readin
PART II: KNOWLEDGE BY TESTIMONY
Week 5: The Nature and Warrant of Testimony
Tuesday 09/30: Jennifer Lackey, "Testimony: Acquiring Knowledge from Others"
Thursday 10/02: John Hardwig, "Epistemic Dependence"
Week 6: Epistemic Standing and Epistemic Injustice
Tuesday 10/07: Linda Alcoff, "The Problem of Speaking for Others"
Thursday 10/09: Miranda Fricker, "Epistemic Injustice and a Role for Virtue in the Politics of Knowing"
Week 7: Midterm
Tuesday 10/14: Review and Discussion
Thursday, October 16th: Midterm Exam
PART III: KNOWLEDGE BY ACQUAINTANCE
Week 8: Knowledge by Acquaintance
Tuesday 10/21: Matt Duncan, "Acquaintance"
Thursday 10/23: Susanna Siegel, "Which Properties are Represented in Perception?"
Week 9: Skepticism and Knowledge of the External World
Tuesday 10/28: G. E. Moore, "Proof of an External World"
Thursday 10/30: David Chalmers, "Is It Likely that We're in a Simulation?" in Reality+: Virtual Worlds and the Problems of Philosophy
Week 10: Knowledge of Minds
Tuesday 11/04 Thomas Nagel, "What is it Like to be a Bat?"
Thursday 11/06: Peter Carruthers, "How We Know Our Own Minds"
PART IV: REASONING
Week 11: Reason and Bias
Tuesday 11/11: Lewis Carroll, "What the Tortoise Said to Achilles" and Fred Dretske, "Epistemic Operators"
Thursday 11/13: Thomas Gilovich & Dale Griffin, "Introduction – Heuristics and Biases: Then and Now"
Week 12: Science and Imagination
Tuesday 11/18: Nick Cowen & Nancy Cartwright, "Disagreement about Evidence-Based Policy"
Thursday 11/20: Magdalena Balcerak Jackson, "On the Epistemic Value of Imagining, Supposing, and Conceiving"
Sunday, November 23rd: Essay Due
PART V: THE ETHICS OF BELIEF
Week 13: Evidential and Pragmatic Grounds of Belief
Tuesday 11/25: W.K. Clifford, "The Ethics of Belief" and Williams James, "The Will to Believe"
Thursday 11/27: Thanksgiving -- NO CLASS
Week 14: Moral Grounds of Belief and Course Wrap-Up
Tuesday 12/02: Rima Basu, "Can Beliefs Wrong?"
Thursday 12/04: Course Review
Week 15: Final Exam
Sometime between December 9th and December 12th: Final Exam
(the Registrar will specify the place and time later during the semester)
|
|
|