|
|
JOHN CABOT UNIVERSITY
COURSE CODE: "PH/RL 224-2"
COURSE NAME: "Living the Good Life: Religious and Philosophical Ethics"
SEMESTER & YEAR:
Spring 2015
|
SYLLABUS
INSTRUCTOR:
Thomas Govero
EMAIL: [email protected]
HOURS:
MW 3:00PM 4:15PM
TOTAL NO. OF CONTACT HOURS:
45
CREDITS:
3
PREREQUISITES:
OFFICE HOURS:
by appointment including weekends
|
|
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
AIMS AND SCOPE OF THE COURSE
The word "Ethics" is derived from the Greek for "to wish, be willing to", or making choices. The course will examine this process of
making choices in as much as they affect the "other", the community, the greater range of humanity and the natural environment.
Since the Greeks, this act or the process of making choices and decisions in Western thought has been based on Reason
or "mind over matter". But what about the passions and emotions? Or are human decisions determined by natural, innate (essentialist)
conditions, or are they the results of nurturing, acquired, or developmental processes (existentialist)? What is the relation of ethics to
morality? The course will examine these questions and others related to the vast discipline of moral philosophy.
In addition, the course will probe and debate the principle texts in ethics from the Greeks to contemporary interpretations while
occasionally making comparative references to other traditions such as Buddhism and Confusionism.
Ultimately, the aim of the course is to examine, discuss, raise questions and debate the interpretations of ethical issues and their
applications today. How did historical interpretations shape today's moral questions and how can they impact on the individual's
daily attitudes, choices, and decisions? Therefore, the course will progress on two fronts: chronologically and diachronogially.
|
SUMMARY OF COURSE CONTENT:
. Basic definitions and concepts: ethics/morality, essentialism/existentialism (nature versus nurture), cultural relativism, empathy,
compassion, narcissim, "the other", violence, reason, dialectism subjectivity. metaethics, normative ethics, applied ethics.
. Religion and Ethics, Morality: Predestination, Natural Law, Stoicism/Epicureanism, Essentialism, Divine Intervention
. The Social Contract and Voluntary/Involuntary Subjection. Slavery, rape, kidnapping, violence. The Prisoner's Dilemma, Etienne de la Boethie
. The question of absolute moral and ethical determinates: Plato, Kant
. Utilitarian Arguments: Bentham, Mill: Euthanasia, Treatment of Animals. Montaigne
. Virtue Ethics: empathy, compassion, ethics of care. New Testament
. Conflict and War: The Just War? Augustine, Thomas Aquinas
. Friendship: Epicurus (Lucretius), Aristotle, Cicero
. Views of other moral philosophers on the above issues: Aristotle, Hume, Rawls, Adam Smith, Machiavelli
.
.
|
LEARNING OUTCOMES:
By the end of the course......you should:
. Be knowledgable of the details of the ethical systems treated in the course and the debates surrounding them.
. Be able to clearly and succinctly discuss the above in class debates (pros and cons) and in short papers and résumés.
. Take a position on one or more contemporary or historical ethical issues and defend your prosition.
. Be able to identify ethical theories and interpretations with a given philosopher.
. Have a clearer context and basis for making daily, ethical acts.
. Be motivated and concerned to pursue and follow-up ethical issues and their possible solutions.
|
TEXTBOOK:
Book Title | Author | Publisher | ISBN number | Library Call Number | Comments | Format | Local Bookstore | Online Purchase |
xxxx | xxx | xxxx | xxxx | | | | | |
Ethics: the Essential Writings | Gordon Marino (ed.) | Modern Library | 978-0-8129-7778-3 | | Ordered through Almost Corner | | | |
Lord of the Flies | William Golding | Perigree Books | 978-0399501487 | | Ordered through Almost Corner | | | |
|
REQUIRED RESERVED READING:
RECOMMENDED RESERVED READING:
|
GRADING POLICY
-ASSESSMENT METHODS:
Assignment | Guidelines | Weight |
Paper 1 | One two page paper giving the pros and cons of an ethical issue.
Guidlines and criteria to be handed out. | 20% |
Presentation 1 (Study and Research Groups) | Debate, present the multiple factors of an ethical position: interpreters and possible solutions | 20% |
Miterm Paper | Three page paper on choice of ethical issue: pros, cons, context, solution | 20% |
Preesentation 2: Study and Research Group | As in Presentation 1 | 20% |
Final Paper: Five Pages | How is an ethical issue treated by at least three interpreters | 20% |
Study and Research Groups | You will be assigned to a group of 3/4 other students and this will be your
study and research group to prepare the two presentations and other assignments.
Your group will be expected to meet when preparing the assignments, determine a research strategy,
presentation format (power-point, discussion etc.), and divide-up the actual sections for the presentation.
Other details will be discussed in class. | |
Resumes ( 8 - 10) | 8-10 paragraphs summarizing or commenting on the prompt based on readings or lectures | |
-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 cou 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:
AIMS AND SCOPE OF THE COURSE
The word "Ethics" is derived from the Greek for "to wish, be willing to", or making choices. The course will examine this process of
making choices in as much as they affect the "other", the community, the greater range of humanity and the natural environment.
Since the Greeks, this act or the process of making choices and decisions in Western thought has been based on Reason
or "mind over matter". But what about the passions and emotions? Or are human decisions determined by natural, innate (essentialist)
conditions, or are they the results of nurturing, acquired, or developmental processes (existentialist)? What is the relation of ethics to
morality? The course will examine these questions and others related to the vast discipline of moral philosophy.
In addition, the course will probe and debate the principle texts in ethics from the Greeks to contemporary interpretations while
occasionally making comparative references to other traditions such as Buddhism and Confusionism.
Ultimately, the aim of the course is to examine, discuss, raise questions and debate the interpretations of ethical issues and their
applications today. How did historical interpretations shape today's moral questions and how can they impact on the individual's
daily attitudes, choices, and decisions? Therefore, the course will progress on two fronts: chronologically and diachronogially.
|
|
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
|
|
SCEDULE
Date
|
Topic
|
Assigned
Reading
|
Related Reading
|
Other Assignment,
Activity
|
|
M Jan 19
|
Introduction to the Course: Review of Syllabus, Assignments and Logistics. Introductions
|
Ethics: pp. 3 -42
Due: Wed, Feb 4
(attention to the “Ring of Gyges”, Plato Republic, Book II)
|
“How to Read Philosophy”
Novel: W. Golding,
Lord of the Flies
Due:
|
|
|
W Jan 21
|
Terms and Definitions: Ethics and Morals. Freedom and Subserviance; Reason and Will
|
Rachel & Rachel,
“What is Morality?”
|
Research:
Normative Ethics
|
Study and Research Groups: “Guide Lines and Criteria for Presentations”
|
|
M Jan 26
|
Normative Ethics:
. Consequentialism
. Deontology
. Virtue Ethics
|
|
|
|
|
M Jan 28
|
Overview of Ethics:
Chronology and Philosophers
|
|
|
Résumé 1
|
|
W Feb 2
|
Violence , Negotiation and Cooperation
Discussion of Lord of the Flies
|
|
“Prisoner’s Dilemma”
|
Cicero, De Amicitia/On Friendship
|
|
M Feb 4
|
Discussion: “What is Morality?”
|
Stalley: Plato’s Doctrine of Freedom
|
|
Rèsumé 2
|
|
W Feb 9
|
Plato’s Ethics and its
Succession; Stoicism,
Epicureanism
|
|
|
|
|
M Feb 11
|
Plato’s Ethics (con’t).
Doctrine of Freedom
|
Etienne de la Boétie,
The Discourse of Voluntary Servitude
|
|
|
|
W Feb 16
|
Plato (con’t)
|
|
|
Résumé 3
|
|
M Feb 18
|
Discussion of de La Boétie
|
|
|
Paper Assignments:
“Criteria & Guidelines”
|
|
W Feb 23
|
Freedom and Choosing/Aristotle’s Ethics
|
Ethics, pp 46 - 87
|
Study Group 1:
Aristotle
|
Video: Choices
|
|
M Feb 25
|
Study & Research Group 1 on Aristotle
|
|
|
Résumé 4
|
|
W Mar 2
|
Aristotle (con’t)
|
“Ethical Cultures and Traditions”
|
|
|
|
M Mar 4
|
Moral Relativism :
Sophists, Hellenism
Situation Ethics
|
Rachel & Rachel:
The Challenge of Cultural Relativism
|
|
|
|
W Mar 9
|
Moral Relativism:
Discussion of The Challenge…
|
Marcus Aurelius,
Meditations
|
|
Résumé 5
|
|
M Mar 11
|
Discussion of Marcus Aurelius
|
Rachel & Rachel,
Subjectivism in Ethics
|
Study & Research Group 2
|
|
|
W Mar 16
|
Presentation of Study and Research Group 2 on Rachel & Rachel
|
Ethics, pp. 111 – 118 Augustine, City of God Book XIV
|
|
Video:
|
|
M Mar 18
|
Augustine, the problem of evil
|
Ethics, pp .119 – 133 Thomas Aquinas, Summa, XCIV
|
|
|
|
W Mar 25
|
Oral presentations of midterm papers
|
|
|
|
|
M Mar 30
|
Oral presentations of midterm papers
|
|
|
|
|
W April 1
|
Review and Catch-up
Midterm papers due.
|
Ethics: pp. 134 – 148 Hobbes, Leviathan
|
Study Group 3:
Hobbes.
Study Group 4:
Hume
|
|
|
April 6 – 10
|
Spring Break
|
|
|
|
|
April 13
|
Presentation: Study Group 3, Hobbes
|
Ethics, pp. 149 – 187. Hume, An Inquiry Concerning Principles of Morals
|
Final Paper Assignment (criteria and guidelines to be handed out)
|
|
|
April 15
|
Presentation:
Study Group 4: Hume
|
Ethics: pp. 225 – 255 J. S. Mill, Utilitarianism
|
Study Group 4:
Coles and Nagel;
Study Group 5: Kant
|
Ethics: pp. 350-355; pp. 455 – 461; pp. 188 -224;
Résumé 6
|
|
April 20
|
Study Group 4 & 5,
Coles, Nagel, Kant
|
Ethics, pp. 506 – 529, Singer, Rich and Poor
|
|
|
|
April 22
|
Discussion of Poverty and Wealth, Kleptocracy
|
Rachels & Rachels:
"What Would a Satisfactory Moral Theory be Like?"
|
|
|
|
April 27
|
Overview and Review
|
|
|
|
|
April 29
|
Last Class
Overview and Review (con’t)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Please Note: the above readings and assignments may be altered or modified.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|